But what about the fact that every stadium is a FEMA camp hiding in plain sight, stagnantly awaiting its grim use one day in the near future? (Think New Orleans Super Dome)

The roots of this diabolic agenda trace back to the Reagan/Oliver North era and theREX84 Program.

However, modern-day Congress is still approving these camps under the guise of terror provisions set forth by the staged attacks of 9/11 and USA PATRIOT Act which was signed into law by Bush in 2001 but created years before to be implemented after the Oklahoma City Bombing, which, to this day, has been covered up by corrupt FBI and Southern Poverty Law Center operatives.

Yesterday, an urban warfare drill conducted over downtown Los Angeles had area residents shaken up as 4 black OH-6 “Little Birds” and one “Blackhawk” helicopter with military personal aboard, invaded the city of angels, with more drills set for today.

Sadly these military maneuvers by special operations forces of the U.S. military are now nearly commonplace in the CONUS.

Helicopters hovered for awhile over the US Bank building, made a drop at a park, and flew over the Lakers Stadium while a game was in progress.

The operational forces used the Dodgers Stadium as a staging point (mock FEMA Camp) to base the training session out of.

Stadiums have and will be used as FEMA camps during martial law type situations during future civil unrest and or economic collapse.

Hurricane Katrina was a prime example of how law enforcement and military work together during times of martial law to set up FEMA camps in sports stadiums as well as take part in large scale, illegal gun confiscation.

One curious aspect of the ‘Exercise’ is the involvement of the AON Tower. As recently mentioned in the New York Times in the January 11th Edition, AON is leaving the United States.

Larry Silverstein signed the lease just six weeks before the WTC’s twin towers were brought to the ground by terrorists in the September 11, 2001, attacks.

Silverstein contended that the two jetliners crashing into the twin towers about 15 minutes apart should be considered two separate events, which would allow him to collect the maximum from the insurers for each tower, as much as $7 billion.

After all, this line of possible affiliation is logical given that Aon is an Insurance Company who would have benefited from such a covert secret government operation.

In fact, Chicago is Aon’s corporate headquarters in the United States and was designated the WTC of Chicago. Is there a possibility that a False-Flag Operation and subsequent rescue operation is being practiced ‘right-in-plain-sight’?

Is there the possibility that a Nuclear Event might be planned for Chicago – Obamas Hometown and now the preplanning stages for Martial Law Implementations by Rham Emanuel and the G8 Summit?

Is this conspiracy theory or are we witnessing the planning stages of a Flase-Flag Event that could bring about Martial Law – the result of Domestic Terrorism?

Comments Off on Militarized Drills Continue Stadiums Prepped to Be Used as Martial Law Staging Centers

Lovers of liberty have seemingly had a good bit to celebrate over the past two weeks.

First, there was an unprecedented outpouring of negative public sentiment about the Congressional bills SOPA (House) and PIPA (Senate); they are legislation that would have thrown a large governmental monkey wrench into the relatively smooth-running cogs of the Internet. Millions of Americans signed online petitions against the bills (I did) after seeing websites' various protests. Google shrouded its search page in black; Wikipedia, and Reddit went dark entirely (although Wikipedia could be accessed if one read the information available via clicking the sole link on its protest page); Facebook and Twitter urged users to contact their representatives; and many other core Internet businesses also raised their voices in opposition.

Such was the outpouring of dissent that even Washington, D.C. had to listen. The bills, which a week earlier had seem assured of swift passage, suddenly turned to poison. Supporters, forced to concede that the public really was pissed off this time, fled. Leadership in both houses tabled the legislation, pending further review and revision.

But before we get too self-congratulatory, however, it's wise to note that this victory dish is probably best enjoyed with a serving of caution. As Casey Extraordinary Technology editor Alex Daley summed up the situation for us here at Casey Research: "Be sure this will come back again, likely post-election, and snuck through as part of a bigger package. It arrests power from the judiciary, and the legislature likes nothing more than to thumb its nose at those ridiculous judges and all their due process this and Constitution that. It will eventually pass, just not like this." We can't now go to sleep on this one.

Second, on Monday the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that police may not attach a GPS tracking device to a suspect's car without a search warrant. This is a landmark decision, to be sure, but one that was carefully circumscribed by the justices. The placing of the device constituted a physical intrusion on the suspect, they wrote, and thus was impermissible. Left unruled upon was the larger question of tracking someone's movements when there was no physical violation, as would be the case when, say, police access signals from a GPS-enabled smartphone. Though it wasn't directly addressed, the concurring opinions strongly suggest that the justices might be more sharply divided on that issue.

A lapse of vigilance in these matters would be a mistake.

Since both of them are tech-related, and also since it's January, this is probably a good time to review how individual freedom fared over the past year vis à vis the technology of surveillance in general.

But before I do, I need to make a couple of things clear.

Where We Stand

At Casey Extraordinary Technology, we are not technophobes. We don't think that it would be a good thing to retreat to the woods and live out our days spearing game and cooking it over fires. Quite the contrary. We're technophiles who appreciate what tech has done to improve human living conditions, and we believe that it holds the key to the solution of many, if not all, of our present problems. We like to err on the side of hope.

In addition, we understand that society has a powerful interest in maintaining a certain level of order. It's intolerable that personal disputes should be settled by gun battles in the streets or that serious infringements on the rights of others – whether it be physical crimes such as robbery, rape, or murder, or non-physical ones like fraud – should be ignored. The most ardent libertarian would generally agree that a government ought to have the authority to prevent or punish the aggression of one individual upon another and to enforce contracts freely entered into. Thus tradeoffs with our basic right to do as we see fit must be made if man's worst impulses are to be deterred.

That said, the tricky part is deciding where to draw the line between reasonable and overzealous laws and enforcements. Surveillance technology is at the center of this debate. It's good and getting ever better. Even the most law-abiding of citizens have been subjected to steadily increasing levels of governmental – as well as private sector – watchfulness over their daily lives. That has occurred with no indication that the public is yet prepared to say, "Enough. This is where we draw that line in the sand."

Remote-controlled drone aircraft, like the famed Predator, have become a staple of the nightly news. We see them launching missiles against terrorists, conducting spy missions over Pakistan, patrolling the borders looking for drug smugglers and alien infiltrators. Now we're going to have to get used to seeing them in the skies over, well, all of us.

Yes, those same Predator drones are being used increasingly by local law enforcement in the US.

That was unknown to most Americans before late last year, when the great North Dakota cattle-rustling incident hit the press. It seems that back in June, six neighbors' cows had the misfortune to wander onto a 3,000-acre farm in eastern North Dakota owned by the Brossart family, whose members allegedly belong to the Sovereign Citizen Movement, an anti-government group that the FBI considers extremist and violent.

When the sheriff attempted to reclaim the cows, the family refused to give them up, ordering him off its property at gunpoint. A 16-hour standoff ensued, with the sheriff requesting the usual reinforcements: state highway patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, and deputy sheriffs from three other counties. But he also called nearby Grand Forks Air Force Base and asked for help from a $154 million MQ-9 Predator B drone, normally used to secure the Canadian border for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Long story short, the drone silently surveilled the farm from two miles up, relaying information from its sophisticated sensors as to what the Brossarts were doing. When the surveillance showed that the family members had put their weapons down (yes, it can see that well at that distance), the authorities moved in, neutralizing the Brossarts and making the first known, drone-assisted arrests of US citizens.

Law enforcement was pleased, perhaps rightly so. No blood was spilled. Another Ruby Ridge was avoided. The cows – street value $6,000, but now rather a bit more costly – were recovered.

But that was just the beginning. Local North Dakota police say they have used the Grand Forks Predators to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since June. The FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration have also used Predators for domestic investigations, officials admit. And Michael Kostelnik, a retired Air Force general who heads the office that supervises the drones, says that Predators are flown "in many areas around the country, not only for federal operators, but also for state and local law enforcement and emergency responders in times of crisis." [emphasis mine]

Who knew?

Apparently not Congress, for one. Spokespersons for Customs, which owns the drones, claim there is legal authorization for this usage because it was clearly indicated in the purchase request for the Predators that one purpose was "interior law enforcement support." But those four words sailed right by Congresswoman Jane Harman – Chair of the Homeland Security Subcommittee at the time the drone purchases were approved – who insists that "no one ever discussed using Predators to help local police." So this expanded civilian use of military surveillance hardware came about with no new law, no public discussion, not even a written regulation… just a few words buried in a budget request that no one in charge of approving it noticed.

There will be mission creep here, as there always is. Expect drones to gather data on any large political demonstration, for example – only, to be fully accurate, you won't be noticing them above you. They fly too high and are too silent for that.

Internet Surveillance

In addition to SOPA/PIPA, there is PCIP. SOPA/PIPA were about shutting down Internet sites that the federal government deems offensive. PCIP is about gathering information.

As is so often the case with "well-meaning" legislation, the Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 (H.R. 1981, or PCIP) is allegedly aimed at something about which all agree. Nobody argues against shielding kids from pornographers.

Not that the problem addressed isn't real. The Internet has proven to be a fertile stalking ground for sexual predators. As a society, we have already agreed to a certain level of cyber-entrapment, allowing police to run online sting operations against those who are actively targeting kids. If that catches some innocent people in the net, so be it. The public majority is willing to accept such collateral damage so long as the real bad guys are found and put away.

But, as always, the details are alive with devils. PCIP is also about pre-crimes – i.e., it entails gathering evidence before any crime is committed… perhaps even before said crime is contemplated. The goal is that, in the event of an arrest, supporting online records can quickly and easily be subpoenaed.

In order to accomplish that, everyone must be considered a potential criminal. Everyone.

What PCIP will mandate is that Internet providers keep detailed records about each one of us, including: name, address, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, all Internet activity for the previous 12 months (something sure to be extended after the first successful busts), and any IP addresses assigned to you – without a search warrant, court order, or even the slightest suspicion of criminal activity.

In other words, the government is proposing to expand the ranks of de facto private-sector cops, the same way that banks are now forced to report any "suspicious financial activity." The legislation would enlist – nay, require – ISPs to compile detailed dossiers on every citizen, and to have them readily accessible for whatever "crime-fighting" or other purposes authorities want them. This thereby saves federal government officials the trouble and expense of doing it themselves. It's breathtaking. You almost have to admire the elegance of their solution to the universal 'Net surveillance problem that's vexed them for some time.

No wonder the Electronic Frontier Foundation has scornfully tabbed this the "Data Retention Bill," warning that the stored data "could become available to civil litigants in private lawsuits – whether it's the RIAA trying to identify downloaders, a company trying to uncover and retaliate against an anonymous critic, or a divorce lawyer looking for dirty laundry." And in a grotesque illustration of the law of unintended consequences, the EFF adds: "These databases would also be a new and valuable target for black hat hackers, be they criminals trying to steal identities or foreign governments trying to unmask anonymous dissidents."

H.R. 1981 sailed through the House Judiciary Committee in late July of last year but is yet to be voted on (although it was slated for "expedited consideration" in mid-December). Will it provoke the kind of public outcry directed against SOPA? Don't count on it. What politician in his or her right mind would dare oppose legislation that "protects kids from pornographers?"

Reverse Surveillance

Meaning: when we turn the cameras on the government.

In a sense, we are all now street journalists. Most famously, the name "Rodney King" would mean nothing to anyone today but for a bystander with a cell phone camera. As these devices have become all but ubiquitous, we ordinary citizens now have an unprecedented ability to record crimes in progress, regardless of what side of the law the perpetrators are on.

Or do we?

While police understandably have welcomed citizen recordings that help them with their cases, they are again understandably not so sanguine when they themselves are the potential lawbreakers. And they're hitting back. People filming unfolding events are routinely ordered away from the scene by the police, even if they happen to be standing on their own private property – and threatened with arrest if they don't put the camera away.

Considering the First Amendment to the Constitution, that's been a bluff… at least until recently.

Now authorities are asserting their right to charge video- or audiographers of police events with crimes ranging from obstruction of justice to eavesdropping to illegal wiretapping.

So far, to their credit, the courts have been mostly unsympathetic. In August, a jury acquitted a Chicago woman who used her cell phone to secretly record a conversation with police investigators about a sexual harassment complaint she was filing against the department. Also in August, the US Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled in favor of the defendant in a case involving a complaint filed by a Boston man who filmed the scene of an October 2007 arrest on his cell phone, only to be arrested himself and charged with a violation of Massachusetts wiretapping laws.

In Illinois in September, a judge threw out five eavesdropping indictments – which carried maximum penalties of 15 years in prison on each count – against a man who had recorded conversations with local police officers who he claimed were harassing him on his own property. In a stinging rebuke to the prosecution, the judge wrote, "A statute intended to prevent unwarranted intrusions into a citizen's privacy cannot be used as a shield for public officials who cannot assert a comparable right of privacy in their public duties. Such action impedes the free flow of information concerning public officials and violates the First Amendment right to gather such information."

So far, so good. Still, these kinds of busts are on the rise nationwide. Even if they're all laughed out of court, the mere threat of arrest (and the potential concomitant bodily harm) is often enough to make most people think twice about the wisdom of challenging a police order.

And, truthfully, would you trust the current Supreme Court – a majority of which has consistently supported government rights over that of citizens – to rule correctly on this?

Target: Casey Research!

One of the most ominous developments for us personally crawled out from under its rock in November. Again without any public debate, DHS unleashed its National Operations Center's Media Monitoring Initiative. Yep, it's exactly what it sounds like: The NOC's Office of Operations Coordination and Planning is going to collect information from news anchors, journalists, reporters, or anyone who may use "traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed."

Thus Washington, D.C. unilaterally grants itself the right to monitor what you say. Doesn't matter if you're the New York Times, Brian Williams, a basement blogger, an online whistleblower, or known government critics like ourselves. They're gonna take note of your utterances and file them away for future use.

Journalists are not the only targets, by the way. Also included among those subject to this surveillance are government officials (domestic or not) who make public statements; private-sector employees who do the same; and "persons known to have been involved in major crimes of Homeland Security interest," however large that umbrella might be.

At Casey Research, we're not about to engage in self-censorship just because some bureaucrat somewhere has nothing better to do than watch what we're saying. They're welcome to it, and we'll save them the trouble of archiving it; most of it's preserved on our website, anyway.

The larger speculation is: what's the endgame here?

Data Storage Capacity

Back in 1997, I wrote an article entitled Here's Looking at You, which examined the ways in which big government was encroaching upon our private lives. The piece was published in February 1998 in a very popular national men's magazine. (In my defense, I hasten to add that these glossy periodicals were among the very few public outlets, before Casey Research was born, for journalists who wrote about such "fringe" topics.)

As I was writing this piece you are now reading, I couldn't help but take a look back fourteen years. It seems almost like a prehistoric era… before 9/11, the PATRIOT Act, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, drones, "free-speech zones" at political conventions, wall-penetrating radar, iPhones, and wholesale government monitoring of email and phone conversations, among a zillion other things. Heck, even the Internet was still more or less a novelty: I found that I had cautioned readers to be mindful of an insidious newfangled thing called "cookies."

The tech of today is light-years more advanced. But even back then, I was concerned. And I predicted where I saw the trend heading. Naturally enough, not all of my predictions came to pass – I was certain for instance that by now we'd have a national ID card – but unfortunately, most of them did.

The reason I bring this up here is not to tout myself as particularly prescient. It's to note something of actual importance. In 1998, I could still maintain that our saving grace was that data-storage capabilities were way insufficient for the total surveillance of hundreds of millions of Americans and probably would be for a long time to come.

How wrong I was.

It is already technologically feasible for governments to record nearly everything that is said or done within their borders – every phone conversation, electronic message, social media interaction, the movements of nearly every person and vehicle, and video from every street corner.

Before long, it'll also be financially feasible to archive it, according to a sobering report published last December by the Brookings Center for Technology Innovation.

The report concludes that: "Plummeting digital storage costs will soon make it possible for authoritarian regimes to not only monitor known dissidents, but to also store the complete set of digital data associated with everyone within their borders. These enormous databases of captured information will create what amounts to a surveillance time machine, enabling state security services to retroactively eavesdrop on people in the months and years before they were designated as surveillance targets. This will fundamentally change the dynamics of dissent, insurgency and revolution."

Emphasis mine. Consider the implications.

The key, according to the Brookings report: "Over the past three decades, [data] storage costs have declined by a factor of 10 approximately every 4 years, reducing the per-gigabyte cost from approximately $85,000 (in 2011 dollars) in mid-1984 to about five cents today.” Using GPS, mobile phone and WiFi inputs, “identifying the location of each of one million people to [a 15-foot] accuracy at 5-minute intervals, 24 hours a day for a full year could easily be stored in 1,000 gigabytes, which would cost slightly over $50 at today's prices." Fourteen cents a day to archive the collective movements of any selected million of us.

Phone calls? "The audio for all of the telephone calls made by a single person over the course of one year could be stored using roughly 3.3 gigabytes. On a per capita basis, the cost to store all phone calls will fall from about 17 cents per person per year today to under 2 cents in 2015."

Video storage takes far more space, of course, and there are also major logistical problems involved in managing such a huge amount of data. But the point is made. Technological innovation will provide the tools. And as soon as government can do something, they invariably will do it.

Investing

These few examples, winnowed from hundreds of others I could cite, testify to a mushrooming new industry in the US, what some have called the cyber-industrial complex.

It's big business. How big we don't know, because much of it is shrouded in either government or corporate secrecy. The WashingtonPost's Dana Priest, twice a Pulitzer winner and one of the few true investigative journalists in America still working inside the mainstream media, published some groundbreaking work on the subject in the summer of 2010. If you haven't read it already, you should. The website is dynamic, with regular updates posted on the subject and reader input invited.

Several other recent probes also have opened the shadowy surveillance world to a little more light. You can check out some of the latest techniques and which companies are implementing them at The Surveillance Catalog published by the Wall Street Journal and The State of Surveillance: The Data,published by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

Perhaps in your browsing you'll find some publicly traded companies that will attract your investment interest. For our part, at Casey Extraordinary Technology we prefer to seek out companies that are engaged in changing our world for the better rather than the worse. Those are the ones you'll find in our portfolio.

In the end, we must acknowledge that technological advancement, especially at the rate we're experiencing it in the present era, is bound to spawn evil applications along with the good. But we're optimists here. We believe humanity is in a long-term uptrend, with technology setting torches on the path to a better life.

But that all depends on keeping people free. That's why we will continue to expose – and oppose – government efforts to stifle innovation, creativity, and personal liberty. I'm not holding my breath but perhaps eventually Washington, D.C. will get the point, and follow our lead. Visit Casey Research

The White Hats and Ed Falcone have been in London all this week meeting daily with key parties interfacing with the House of Lords and UK Agencies. Multiple agendas are in play at the highest levels. The White Hats are using the U.K. arena to commence their work due to the total control that the Dark Cabal … Bushes, Clintons, Obamas and all of their Minions … has had in the United States, including the American Main Stream Media. It is difficult to believe the Bushes have gone undetected for 50 years with a hidden agenda that is so deep they have compromised every American virtue.

Look at some of the items we are working with:• Nominee accounts used by parties fronting for the CIA and Bush Sr. /Josef Ackermann/ Michael Herzog and Paul Guenette, are being discussed and tracked. Using the integrity of the London Capital Markets to fund unauthorized Agency and Military activities, as well as to self-enrich key Political and Government employees, is also under review and being evidenced to appropriate authorities. This week and next, as exposure mounts, more will be presented and played out.

• A vast multi-Trillion dollar fraud involving a Central Intelligence Agency owned Foundation known to us all is also under formal investigation by the British authorities with the Attorney General being kept appraised. This Foundation is bypassing Congress, but benefiting the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Homeland Security and private parties. A well-known Asian Fraudster, Wilfredo Saurin, has been allowed to gain a complicit, FRB NY supported role, protecting him from arrest as an Agent of these entities. Working in conjunction with FRB NY, Saurin and corrupt Bankers have been instrumental in assisting cross wired bogus asset backed SWIFTS, which have been used to generate MTN’s and to participate in substantial inter-bank trading. A complex arena of fraud is now being unraveled. The records are lodged with investigating authorities. The White Hats have copies of the governing documents and the chain of SWIFT sequences and the accounts used.

• As part of this very deep investigation, Edward Falcone’s case has also been raised as a further example of the criminal complicity of banks, and the extent to which the Shadow Government operates with impunity. To start, the Banks involved and the Bank auditing firms will be officially put on notice to respond to their obvious negligence in enforcing international banking regulations and money laundering laws.

The money stolen from and owed to Ed Falcone would have been used to fund United States projects including Florida, the Gulf Coast region and Katrina victims, as well as city regeneration, jobs, taxes, recovery, and dignity for Americans. Instead, Falcone’s money ended up with the Bush Cabal, U.S. Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney, Vice President Joe Biden, Michael Herzog, Paul Guenette, Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, his brother Don Nevin, and the CIA agents used to launder it across multiple banks for Bush Sr. and Biden.

The Cabal has publicly refused to acknowledge the unknown and unregulated extent of their wealth generation, the extent of their cross entanglement with the world drug cartels, their funding of clandestine operations like rendition torture centers, and self severing rogue agendas are just a few of the operations of this group.

• When will Herzog, Guenette, Dewhurst, and Nevin be arrested to start the process of Law? One morning they will all wake up to find a worldwide media firestorm has been unleashed and they are all named and shamed. It is an abhorrent betrayal of an American citizen and humanitarian projects lost to thieves. The White Hats and UK agencies have been allowed unfettered access to review the enormous depth of support documentation behind the Falcone case. London, Frankfurt, Germany and other EU based Traders are all cross linked and identified. Banks, trades, monthly profits and returns are all on record. There are criminal cases for Wire Fraud, domestic and international bank fraud, Securities Fraud and RICO for institutions and individuals. Volume after volume has been documented and evidenced. Herzog has threatened to take down Bush when he is exposed and there is enough evidence to directly incriminate both Herzog, Guenette, Dewhurst and Nevin many times over. Commerzbank in Frankfurt, Germany and Fed records are all held including the Isle of Man Banks used to hide profits and all other illicit activities. Equally exposed on record are the named Nominees they tried to hide their profits behind, including amounts the Traders used, along with all account information. One day, Mr. Herzog, Mr. Guenette, Mr. Dewhurst, and Mr. Nevins… That knock on the door is coming for you. Never thought you’d be reading this, did you? Your arrogance will be your undoing.

• Bank accounts on record with Bush Sr. and son, Jeb Bush, are counter linked as signatories. This will have a huge impact on poor Jeb’s political aspirations even though he may not have been involved in the original heist. Those co-signed accounts exist and are also part of the Falcone evidence files.

• Obama has been busy accepting funds from numerous sources and are held in his very own offshore bank accounts. This information is held by Falcone’s attorneys and the White Hats, and will be further exposed as he attempts re-election. Obama, do you not think we are going to let the American public know about your dirty, corrupted self?

• Why have Bill Bonney and the Argo Trust still not been settled? Just these two elements of the Global Settlements represent Trillions of dollars for American Projects, jobs and the elimination of the US national debt of 15 Trillion dollars.

Again, Herzog threatened he would expose Bush Sr. if he’s made to pay back what they have stolen. ARREST HERZOG AND GUINETTE, AND CLEAN UP AMERICA! Arrest Dewhurst and Nevin, and impeach Biden. Let the White Hats expose the criminal activities of Mitt Romney! How can Mitt run for President when he is responsible for hundreds of offshore bank accounts that have skirted U.S tax laws?

Americans have no idea that the Shadow Government and the Military Industrial Complex take not only 55% of all known accrued U.S. Tax income, but also works in conjunction with the co-owned Cabal Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which maintains a vast unauthorized Ponzi Pyramid Cash Machine hidden from Congress.

These groups engage in so many clandestine activities often beyond the rule of law or ethics, while our inner cities decay and collapse as crime and drugs thrive. This money feeds the Cabal, not our own people. Multi-Trillions are squandered annually paying for this Second-Tier Government, unelected and unchecked, answering only to Agency Shadow bosses like Bush Sr. and Senator Jay Rockefeller, etc.

Again, Wilfredo Saurin, a well-known Filipino crook, acting for, protected by, and in complicit conspiracy with an Agency controlled Foundation, FRB NY, and JP Morgan Chase, has implemented the release of bogus and fraudulent SWIFTS, which have been used in a trading sequence, with no Congressional knowledge or authorization, to cause the issuance of $15 Trillion dollars’ worth of MTN’s. The MTN’s are not only re-credit lined, but capital used to reverse MTN and Euro overnight spot trades via London and other EU banks. All these players work hand in glove with these crooks. This fraud inquiry is now under way.

The White Hats have access to the morally good and highly connected associates both in place and in play, right now each day, willing to help recover a good part of that money for the benefit of America and the world. We need accessible courageous US Congressmen. As we reported previously, there is a solution to regenerate The American Economy, American Jobs, and American Wealth. RELEASE THE MONEY TO REFUND THE GLOBAL SETTLEMENTS and SAVE THE WORLD!

However, we have Romney being prepared for office – A dubious man who stole Ed Falcone’s funds and pocketed a Billion for himself. We also have an illegal President with no Birth Certificate, with his hands in the pockets of Wall Street, with some very dangerous socialists and communists advisors, and America’s own fanatical version of Dr. Strangelove — conspiring and planning to get Jeb Bush elected as the next Vice President, or even President, once the pending writs are served on Romney. It looks like Romney may also face real IRS investigation soon on his false Tax Returns. We must ask the IRS — What about Romney’s offshore accounts with money he earned from the theft of the Falcone funds? Is your boss Geithner NOT letting you investigate the corruption?

The Agency Foundation and Obama tried desperately to get the 15 Trillion back from London but the banks won’t release it. Britain and America need to work together on this. WAKE UP CONGRESS! Those funds can be recovered in a deal with the United Kingdom! If you do not have the ability to step to the plate, The White Hats Do! Let us get the deal done.

Both the United Kingdom and America have been so badly screwed. America has simply become far too crooked for Justice to be accomplished here. America’s future and fate may well be playing out as these treasonous parties are exposed by Old Empires, whose own authorities are now availing themselves of the sordid facts. All records are being presented live and directed to Agency heads who are currently evaluating the hard-to-swallow evidence now placed before them. When you can’t get Justice at home, sometimes you have to get it another way. Again, at this very moment, all the facts, supporting evidence and brutal yet sordid truth, is being exposed naming and shaming those responsible for the deplorable and duplicitous conduct of our Leaders and Global Banker cohorts, including Ackermann of Deutsch and the full Commerzbank Traders and other connections.

It took many years to bring down Capone, and the Teflon Don. Focused dedication got them in the end. The spirit of Elliot Ness lives on. Because you don’t see it, doesn’t mean it’s not happening. All the evidence and facts are right now under appraisal by Foreign Enforcement Agencies who, in consultation with others, will select the route and time to unleash justice and retribution. We will not compromise sensitive incriminating evidence needed in court by pre-publishing. Just know we have it, it’s all there and it’s all playing out.

We will be in touch. Remember to keep a close eye and ear on the inner sanctums of Great Britain as the exposure is delivered to that great Sovereign body.

Many of us breathed a sigh of relief when an overwhelming amount of Americans banned together and voiced their opposition to Congress over both the Stop Online Piracy Act, and Protect Intellectual Property Act.

Sites that dimmed the screen for a day or two have gone back to normal — Facebook users have swapped their anti-SOPA images for their previous profile pictures.

We may have even believed that the postponement of the vote originally scheduled for January 24th was some sort of white flag of capitulation. But that is certainly not the MO of most lawmakers.

While the outcry did get the attention of Congress, they are simply returning unflinchingly back to the drawing board to wait out our attention spans. Articles whirled that SOPA was dead and the bill was pulled when the bill's sponsor Lamar Smith said in a statement that there would be no further action “until there is wider agreement on a solution.”

Lamar isn't really listening. “It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.”

Actually, SOPA is set to be reformulated in February. PIPA will be revisited with possible amendments in the coming weeks. Case in point, all is still open and possible — nothing is dead, pulled, or cancelled. If that wasn't enough to keep us on our toes, a new, similar bill has surfaced.

Déjà Vu in the form of OPEN — The New Anti-Piracy Bill

As an alternative to SOPA-PIPA, Representative Darrell Issa (CA-R), and 24 co-sponsors introduced the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) H.R. 3782 on Wednesday, during the Internet blackout.

OPEN would give oversight to the International Trade Commission (ITC) instead of the Justice Department, focuses on foreign-based websites, includes an appeals process, and would apply only to websites that "willfully" promote copyright violation.

The bill pretends to only target foreign websites, while keeping Americans free to surf and post, but the bill's wording is wide open to pursue American sites. Just one example: when describing an infringing site, it starts with those "that are accessed through a non-domestic domain name," but continues in section (8)(A)(ii) for any site that "conducts business directed to residents of the United States."

It sounds like, "in general," copyright holders will be the ones filing complaints to the Commission, but the writing leaves it open for any complainant to file. The ITC would still have the ability to coerce payment processors and ad networks to cease funding and linking the accused in question. Who could determine "willful" infringement?

Also, none of these bills had been decided before the U.S. Government took down New Zealand owned Megaupload.com during the commotion. To which, Anonymous responded by shutting down the websites of the U.S. Department of Justice, Universal Music, Recording Industry Association of America, the U.S. Copyright Office, Broadcast Music Inc. and the Motion Picture Association of America.

"The [DOJ’s] action 'demonstrates why we don’t need SOPA in the first place,' points out PC-World’s Tony Bradley." The government was enforcing a previous anti-piracy law called PRO-IP signed by Bush in 2008.

OPEN is gaining support from groups like Google, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Consumer Electronics Association and more.

While it seems admirable that the bill is transparent and open for public comment, most laws of this nature are broad and allow for bigger, no-common sense crackdowns later. Plus, there might only be a couple concessions and the pacifying effects of "being heard."

One commenter of the bill aptly noted:

'Reasonable belief' and 'credible evidence' are too vague and have the appearance of inviting highly subjective interpretation with the option for the commission and/or the provider to exercise sweeping powers with impunity.

Whenever any group is appeased after a battle, it cannot be emphasized enough — the lawmakers' modus operandi will be: aim high, brace for the outcry, make a couple alterations and sneak the bill back in when no one's looking. Keep it going and going. Call it by a different name. Haggle. It appears there is compromise and reasoning now, but once the bill passes into law, reason goes out the window, and we are the only ones compromised.

Theft is a reality — although not one that has seriously damaged the growing entertainment industry, or caused massive death and devastation. If Hollywood, pitching the biggest fit, were actually going down, why should we go down with it?

It is more unfortunate that Americans must be so tirelessly vigilant to protect their online activities from the same lawmakers who are tanking the country in so many other truly devastating ways.

The dismantling of Internet freedom will not stop here. Let's borrow an MO and not let up.

To SOPA — Say NOPA!

To PIPA — Pipe down!

To OPEN — Shut it!

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Let us not forget that this is a legal issue between the copy-write holder, and the copy-write violator, and the violator is innocent until a court finds them guilty. Hardly a reason to violate a couple hundred million people’s privacy. Who are these assholes trying to fool? Does congress think the whole damn internet community is as stupid as they are?

Due to the present Republican debates, and the actions of that scallywag in the oval office, many of my readers have a regenerated interest in politics’, as shown by the much more astute questions and comments I receive. Due to my age and memory problems, I have been sorely tasked to answer many questions, but, as always, persistence pays off and I recalled this article I published on 11-21-10 which every breathing American needs to read until they fully understand what is being presented. I implore all of you to give this your best effort, as it will answer many questions concerning our freedom, and what to expect in the near future. You can do your young adult family members no greater service than to expose them to this informative treatise. Obama will probably use this to make that Alabama Judge look like a fool, if he even bothers to show up! BTW, I’m taking bets he will not show up.

This information was provided by Wikipedia until for some unknown reason it was deleted. The entry explains (and confirms Rod Class research) how our country was transformed from a Constitutional Republic of independent states into a federal corporation.

The premise for the State National is inherent to the Law of Nations and the Principles of Natural Law. Emerich de Vattel noted that every nation that governs itself, under what form so-ever, without dependence on any foreign power, is a sovereign state, its rights are naturally the same as those of any other state. Such are the moral persons who live together in a natural society, subject to the law of nations. To give a nation a right to make an immediate figure in this grand society, it is sufficient that it be really sovereign and independent, that is, that it govern itself by its own authority and laws.[1] The members of a nation carry a nationality of a state/nation, which is considered the international, or external, recognition of a citizen—i.e., the political office or status—as to his or her having belonging to a nation. The country of which they are members are considered to be the state,[2] which refers to estate, or status or condition of the society and its dominion. The lawful dominion of a nation would be considered legitiums principatus (the legitimate owner or principal), from the Latin.

THE FEDERATION STATE

The Law of Nations recognizes that several sovereign and independent states may unite themselves together by a perpetual confederacy, without ceasing to be, each individually, a perfect state. They will together constitute a federal republic: their joint deliberations will not impair the sovereignty of each member, though they may, in certain respects, put some restraint on the exercise of it, in virtue of voluntary engagements. A person, i.e., a citizen—the political status, does not cease to be free and independent, when he is obliged to fulfill engagements which he has voluntarily contracted.[3]

The United States of America

THE SEVERAL STATES’ INTERNATIONAL AGENT

The United States of America is considered a federal republic under the Law of Nations. In essence, the nature of the Constitution for the United States of America is grounded in private international law, which is the nature of a treaty or an international agreement between nations. From its inception, the federal government of the United States of America was created to function as a constitutionally limited federation state. In practical sense, this contracted state is fundamentally an agent for several states of the American union. Accordingly, the original federal government—i.e., the United States—did not have nationals of its own. Hence, in strict sense, a federation state is neither a country nor a nation but is simply a contractually created entity functioning as a corporate agent in certain capacities for the benefit of its creator(s). Due to the international nature of its existence, the United States appears to be a country and a nation but only in its external sense in regard to constitutionally specified relations it maintains with other nations or federation states. In such regard, Justice Marshall of the Supreme Court of the United States had noted that:

§ “The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property.”[4]

Thus, the make-up of this of federal republic system, known as the United States of America, is a corporation—under the principles of a corporate body politic, over being a nation/state or government—in regard to the principles of being a government body politic.[5] The latter body politic conforms to the principles of the Law of Nations and the Principles of Natural Law in regard to a people.

STATE NATIONAL BACKGROUND

As to the principles of the Law of Nations, the State National is to be considered an inherent status that is attached to each state/nation in the Union.[6] Prior to the War Between the States and its Reconstruction Acts and Reconstruction Amendments, there was absence of a status entitled “citizen and/or national of the United States” as defined by statute. Generally, before that time, a citizen of the United States meant that such people were a citizen and national of one of the countries within the federal republic known as the United States of America.[7] In adopting the principles of the Law of Nations and the natural law which is attached to it, the American system of law reflected in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Edition, denotes that country means “the state of which one is a member.” The reference further goes on to illustrate the rules of jus sanguinis and jus soli by setting forth that “Every man’s country is in general the state in which he happens to have been born.” Such reference denotes the nationality of the child being dependent on the condition of the father in regard to the nationality of his father.

SUBJUGATION OF STATE NATIONAL STATUS

On July 9, 1868 it is chronicled that the United States implemented the Fourteenth Amendment creating and defining for the first time in American history the person known as a citizen of the United States:

§ “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Prior to the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, and embodied in the Tenth Article in Amendment, the federal government (specifically Congress) could not interfere with the people (representatives) of the American republics/countries. After its implementation,[8] men and women are considered to have dual citizenship, United States citizenship as a primary citizenship, and state citizenship (de facto) as a secondary citizenship. Due to the fact that the United States is a corporate body and not a bona fide nation under the Law of Nations and the Principles of Natural Law, this new status creates the legal entity known as citizen of the United States.[9]

Now, in further exploration of the language found in the Fourteenth Amendment:

§ “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States…”

The wording of privileges and immunities upon citizens of the United States of the Fourteenth Amendment differs from the privileges and immunities clause in the body of the Constitution. Consequently citizens of the United States are legally not entitled to constitutionally enumerated rights due to the fact that they have been voluntarily relinquished. This is a critical element in the distinction between a national of one of the several states and a citizen and national of the United States. The latter which maintains privileges and immunities that are granted, and therefore by definition can be revoked, while the former maintains rights and immunities that are unalienable, and wherefore protected by the Constitution for the United States of America. Therefore, back in reference to the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, it is also of importance that subjugation to jurisdiction is voluntarily and accomplished through the acceptance of benefit through contract, e.g., registering to vote and voting, running for any elected office, working for state or federal government, joining the armed forces, registering a child’s birth by certificate, and obtaining a Social Security Number (which includes maintaining bank accounts and credit cards with such number), licenses, welfare and food stamps, unemployment benefits, etc. It can therefore be concluded that individuals who accept these benefits are by default—as evidenced by their overt actions—are acting in rebellion [10] against the system of government provided under natural law.

The question as to why American nationality was introduced and aggressively promoted by certain factions over state nationality after the War deserves consideration:

§ In the years immediately preceding the War Between the States, Northern countries held significant economic advantages while Southern countries possessed superior agricultural land and productivity output by virtue of their larger, low cost, slave population. Historians and scholars opine, therefore, that economic opportunity may have motivated a Northern invasion of the Southern countries (there is no evidence suggesting Southern countries invaded Northern countries and only the opposite has ever been established).

§ Lastly, a popular theory for explaining the war rests with the study of Southern countries secession from the Union. However, the original constitutional government for the United States was a voluntary creation of the several states and contractually provides for peaceful secession.

Given the disparity of thought for war justification and general lack of consensus for its implementation, it is practical to look at the issue from the top down instead of the bottom up.

§ Bottom up: conditions in an otherwise civilized coalition of independent countries deteriorated in to an aggressive invasion, total war and the deaths of millions.

§ Top down: there was a post-war desired outcome so the specific reasons for invasion, battles and war are of secondary, and debatable, importance.

Judging by the punitive nature of congressional acts commonly referred to as Reconstruction Law and Reconstruction Amendments enacted pursuant to the War (punitive in the sense of deteriorating individual liberties, restrictions upon individuals, and congressional jurisdiction over formerly free men), it is conceivable that much was pre-written before the war including pre-planned objectives. Evidence of this can be no clearer than the “conversion” from state nationals—with their unalienable rights (as protected by the Constitution)—into the de facto citizens of the United States—with their privileges and immunities (as established herein)—within the Fourteenth Amendment. Moreover, it should be noted that the usurpation of the lawful governmental system of natural law is found in state constitutions where primary allegiance to the United States is mandatory.[11]

THE STATE NATIONALS OF THE UNION

The term State National—in reference to the American union of states—is used to describe the status of a man or a woman who formally rejects the federal citizenship of the United States, its benefits and disabilities and required political allegiance. Such people assume the rightful status of a national of their nation (commonly referred to as state in American vernacular) of domicile. Such people have been politically disenfranchised [12] and wherefore maintain their peaceful existence in private societies. The operative distinction is that of nationality by lawful right (de jure) verses nationality of fact (de facto) voluntarily accepted in a political contract. There are relatively few de jure nationals in America due to the fact that most Americans have opted to be citizens and nationals of the United States and contract into its privileges, immunities, and liabilities; by operation of law, such people are considered to bein rebellionand arelegal entitiesover being men and women under the principles of natural law.

§ “The state of a person in relation to the nation in which he was born. A man retains his nationality of origin during his minority, but, as in the case of his domicile of origin, he may change his nationality upon attaining full age; he cannot, however, renounce his allegiance without permission of the government.”

It is understandable, therefore, that the United States Congress had to make the new federal nationality and citizenship a voluntary political choice in order not to infringe upon the natural rights of men and women and consequently in 1868 enacted Public Law 15 United States Statutes at Large, Chapter 249, Pages 223-224 (image herein noted). Interestingly, this declaration by Congress was put in place the day before implementation of the Fourteenth Amendment; therefore providing Congress effective cover respecting the guaranteed right of nationality on the eve of the introduction of ITS own brand of corporate based citizenship and nationality as regulated by the Law of Persons.[13]By the language noted in the Preamble of this Act, it is obvious that the intent of Congress was to strip the allegiance of the citizens/nationals of the several states by preying on their ignorance via operation of law: the 14th Amendment.

The State National in America today understands the nature of events culminating in hundreds of millions of men and women for over 140 years volunteering for citizenship status in a de facto governmental system, and in rebellion against their de jure political rights and lawful system of law. A practical historic reference can be found in history in Roman Civil Law. The poignant, yet unfortunate, irony of the matter is conscientious small-government groups whose quest for freedom, liberty and justice is hampered by their own voluntary insertion in to the de facto body politic wherein they themselves are prima facie insurgents in rebellion of the de jure bodies politic who can assure and protect the very liberties they seek.

UNITED STATES’ RECOGNITION OF RIGHTFUL NATIONALITY

Notwithstanding its successful procurement of citizens by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the federal government continues to recognize the State National status.[14] Title 8 of the United States Code (USC) codifies the constitutionally recognized status under “Aliens and Nationality”, which is quasi-public law.[15] The definitions of of Title 8 (Chapter 12, Section 1101) defines a “national” as a person owing permanent allegiance to a state;[16] and further goes on to define that an “alien” is any person not a citizen or national of the United States,[17]which establishes that one is foreign to the political system (under the Fourteenth Amendment).[18] Furthermore, the U.S. Government Printing Office lists the distinct nationalities of the states in Chapter 5.22-5.23 on page 93: Nationalities, etc. Chapter 5.23 shows forms to be used for nouns and adjectives denoting the nationalities of the several states of the Union:[19]

§ “In designating the natives of the States, the following forms will be used: Alabamian, Alaskan, Arizonan, Arkansan, Californian,” and so on.

In contrast to the de jure nationality, the de facto nationality can be found at Title 8 USC §1101(a)(22) – the term “national of the United States” means: (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States.Accordingly, such references establish the distinctions between aState Nationaland anational of the United Stateswithin Title 8 of the United States Code.

UNITED STATES’ NATIONALITY IS EFFECTIVELY GENOCIDE

Finally we are to consider the concepts of genocide and of cultural genocide representing the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group. Although it cannot be contested that national, political and cultural groups formerly known as nationals of the several states have been systematically exterminated (or nearly), one should independently research the political climate in the District of Columbia (1850-1860) to fully understand the federal government’s appetite for consolidation of power, control over its creator(s) and their resources, and the surreptitious influence thereupon by a stealthy influential nonAmerican force. NOTE: Follow that link!!!

§ In reference to the use of “perpetual” in regard to a federal republic by Vattel, the word had this meaning: PERPETUAL. That which is to last without limitation as to time; as, a perpetual statute, which is one without limit as to time, although not expressed to be so (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856). Wherefore, in law it does not mean forever, per se, but means without a specified end to the relationship of the union of nations.

§ It should be noted that prior to the 14th Amendment, the term “alien” meant a person that was not a citizen/national of one of the several states in reference to the federal system. The term in question has appeared in state constitutions (Wisconsin, Bill of Rights, Article I, §15) for property ownership, but was never defined to have meaning in regard to each state being foreign to each other,i.e., someone being an alien from another state in the Union.

4. ^ >From the term, United States of America —Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

5. ^ BODY POLITIC, government, corporations. 1. When applied to the government this phrase signifies the state. 2. As to the persons who compose the body politic, they take collectively the name, of people, or nation; and individually they are citizens, when considered in relation to their political rights, and subjects as being submitted to the laws of the state. 3. When it refers to corporations, the term body politic means that the members of such corporations shall be considered as an artificial person. —Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

6. ^ Article I, section 8, clause 4 of the United States Constitution expressly gives the United States Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. The term “uniform” serves are prima facie evidence that there is more than one country in regard to naturalization and relates one rule for all, i.e., The United States has the ability to create naturalization law for not only people coming into the United States, but also each individual state.

7. ^ The Intent of the 14th Amendment: “We intend to make citizenship National. Heretofore, a man has been a citizen of the United States because he was a citizen of some-one of the States: now, we propose to reverse that, and make him a citizen of any State where he chooses to reside, by defining in advance his national [state] citizenship—and our Amendment declares that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside.” —The Reconstruction Problem, speech of James Blaine, Skowhegan, Maine (August 29, 1866), Page 64.

8. ^ See issues with the violation of the lawful ratification of amendments to the Constitution under Article V.

9. ^ Citizen of a State: A citizen of the United States, residing in any state of the Union; Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (see citizens resident in the state). Citizens Resident in the State: Natural Persons who are citizens and residents, and Corporations chartered in the State. —Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, Third Edition

10. ^ In 1828, Noah Webster defined an insurgent as a person who rises in opposition to civil or political authority and openly and actively resists the execution of laws. He further established that an insurgent differed from a rebel; the insurgent opposes the execution of a particular law or laws; and a rebel attempts to overthrow or change government, or he revolts and attempts to place his country under another authority. Also he noted, all rebels are insurgents, but all insurgents are not rebels.

11. ^Allegiance to the United States. Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of the State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force. —North Carolina State Constitution. Article I-Declaration of Rights, Section 5.

13. ^See The Law of Persons – The Institutes of Roman Law (1892) by Rudolph Sohm. Translated from the 4th Edition of the German by: James Crawford Ledlie, B.C.L., M.A. of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law and of Lincoln College, Oxford.

14. ^SeeTitle 8 USC §1101(a) (21) The term “national” means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state. (23) The term “naturalization” means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.

15. ^ The term quasi-public had never been defined in reference to constitutional law, but is inherent due to the private international law nature of a federal republic.

18. ^ alien, adj. Owing political allegiance to another country or government; foreign: alien residents. n., An un-naturalized foreign resident of a country. Also called noncitizen. View Source

19. ^ Style Manual: An Official Guide to the Form and Style of Federal Government Printing for 2008, Download Filehttp://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2008_style_manual&docid=f:chapter5.pdf

20.

This page was last modified on 18 November 2010 at 01:30. By 20 November 2010 it was deleted completely from Wikipedia.

MORE FROM OLDDOG

I see no reason the reader should not conclude there was an internal political coup just previous to the 14th amendment, and it was intentionally kept in the dark, until the Bankers consolidated their hold over the economy and states. This is the history of the republican party, and it made every attorney in America either a fool, or your sworn enemy. The power in America is in the organization that controls the teaching of law. OF WHICH, the original 13th amendment would have prevented. Do the research, and teach your children to research America’s political history, instead of developing their thumbs dexterity! Maybe they will have enough sense to revolt. See what this old ex-alcoholic patriot accomplished, and be ashamed of your government controlled education. I AM! http://www.barefootsworld.net/

Comments Off on HOW THE SUBJUGATION OF STATE NATIONAL STATUS CAME ABOUT

Threatening New Bill H R 1981 Worse Than SOPA PIPA – This Bill Entitled “The Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act Of 2011″ Is A Bill With Overly Broadened Language That Greatly Threatens All Of Us.

January 20th, 2012

H.R. 1981: Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011

This Lamar guy just doesn't know when to quit! SOPA/PIPA get scrubbed, no worries, just tell people this bill will keep the children safe! And drop in all the stuff from SOPA/PIPA and the sheep will fall for it. Give up your internet freedom, it's for the children! Pathetic.

To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to child pornography and child exploitation offenses.

Status: This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the House as a whole. Explanation: Although it has been placed on a calendar of business, the order in which legislation is considered and voted on is determined by the majority party leadership. Keep in mind that sometimes the text of one bill is incorporated into another bill, and in those cases the original bill, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned. [Last Updated: Dec 17, 2011 6:15AM]

An overzealous bill that claims to be about stopping child pornography turns every Web user into a person to monitor

Every right-thinking person abhors child pornography. To combat it, legislators have brought through committee a poorly conceived, over-broad Congressional bill, The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011. It is arguably the biggest threat to civil liberties now under consideration in the United States. The potential victims: everyone who uses the Internet.

The good news? It hasn’t gone before the full House yet.

The bad news: it already made it through committee. And history shows that in times of moral panic, overly broad legislation has a way of becoming law. In fact, a particular moment comes to mind.

In the early 20th Century, a different moral panic gripped the United States: a rural nation was rapidly moving to anonymous cities, sexual mores were changing, and Americans became convinced that an epidemic of white female slavery was sweeping the land. Thus a 1910 law that made it illegal to transport any person across state lines for prostitution “or for any other immoral purpose.” Suddenly premarital sex and adultery had been criminalized, as scam artists would quickly figure out. “Women would lure male conventioneers across a state line, say from New York to Atlantic City, New Jersey,” David Langum* explains, “and then threaten to expose them to the prosecutors for violation” unless paid off. Inveighing against the law, the New York Times

notedthat, though it was officially called the White Slave Traffic Act (aka The Mann Act), a more apt name would’ve been “the Encouragement of Blackmail Act.”

That name is what brought the anecdote back to me. A better name for the child pornography bill would be The Encouragement of Blackmail by Law Enforcement Act. At issue is how to catch child pornographers. It’s too hard now, say the bill’s backers, and I can sympathize. It’s their solution that appalls me: under language

approved 19 to 10 by a House committee, the firm that sells youInternet access would be required to track all of your Internet activity and save it for 18 months, along with your name, the address where you live, your bank account numbers, your credit card numbers, and IP addresses you’ve been assigned.

Tracking the private daily behavior of everyone in order to help catch a small number of child criminals is itself the noxious practice of police states. Said an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation: “The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American.” Even more troubling is what the government would need to do in order to access this trove of private information: ask for it.

I kid you not — that’s it.

As written, The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 doesn’t require that someone be under investigation on child pornography charges in order for police to access their Internet history — being suspected of any crime is enough. (It may even be made available in civil matters like divorce trials or child custody battles.) Nor do police need probable cause to search this information.

As Rep. James Sensenbrenner says, (R-Wisc.) “It poses numerous risks that well outweigh any benefits, and I’m not convinced it will contribute in a significant way to protecting children.”

Among those risks: blackmail.

In Communist countries, where the ruling class routinely dug up embarrassing information on citizens as a bulwark against dissent, the secret police never dreamed of an information trove as perfect for targeting innocent people as a full Internet history. Phrases I’ve Googled in the course of researching this item include “moral panic about child pornography” and “blackmailing enemies with Internet history.” For most people, it’s easy enough to recall terms you’ve searched that could be taken out of context, and of course there are lots of Americans who do things online that are perfectly legal, but would be embarrassing if made public even with context: medical problems and adult pornography are only the beginning. How clueless do you have to be to mandate the creation of a huge database that includes that sort of information, especially in the age of Anonymous and Wikileaks? How naive do you have to be to give government unfettered access to it? Have the bill’s 25 cosponsors never heard of J. Edgar Hoover?

You’d thing that Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), who claims on his Web site to be “an outspoken defender of individual privacy rights,” wouldn’t lend his name to this bill. But he co-sponsored it! You’d think that the Justice Department of Eric Holder, who is supposed to be friendly to civil libertarians, would oppose this bill. Just the opposite. And you’d think that lots of tea partiers, with all their talk about overzealous government and intrusions on private industry, would object.

But they haven’t.

As Julian Sanchez recently wrote on a related subject, “In an era in which an unprecedented quantity of information about our daily activities is stored electronically and is retrievable with a mouse click, internal checks on the government’s power to comb those digital databases are more important than ever… If we aren’t willing to say enough is enough, our privacy will slip away one tweak at a time.”

Image credit: Flickr user MonkeyManForever*The piece originally stated that David Langum was affiliated with the University of Chicago. In fact, the only connection is that the quoted argument was published by the University of Chicago Press. Thanks to the alert reader who caught my error.

The hardcore tracking bits come from U.S. Code title 18 Part 1 Chapter 121 Section 2703

(2) A provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service shall disclose to a governmental entity the— (A) name; (B) address; (C) local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations; (D) length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized; (E) telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address; and (F) means and source of payment for such service (including any credit card or bank account number),

(1) A governmental entity may require a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service to disclose a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service (not including the contents of communications) only when the governmental entity— …. (E) seeks information under paragraph (2).

(2) A provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service shall disclose to a governmental entity the— (A) name; (B) address; (C) local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations; (D) length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized; (E) telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address; and (F) means and source of payment for such service (including any credit card or bank account number),

(3) A governmental entity receiving records or information under this subsection is not required to provide notice to a subscriber or customer.

tl’dr: Whenever the government wants something, they get it. The only “new” bit is the IP address disclosure. If you don’t upvote this I fully expect you to repost it as much as possible.

EDIT: The time constraints are also altered thanks to jackerran for pointing this out.

Representative Zoe Lofgren, (D-Calif.) one of the most vocal opponents of the bill, presented an amendment to rename the Bill the “Keep Every American’s Digital Data for Submission to the Federal Government Without a Warrant Act.”

America has one last chance, and it is a very slim one. Americans can elect Ron Paul President, or they can descend into tyranny.

Why is Ron Paul America’s last chance?

Because he is the only candidate who is not owned lock, stock, and barrel by the military-security complex, Wall Street, and the Israel Lobby.

All of the others, including President Obama, are owned by exactly the same interest groups. There are no differences between them. Every candidate except Ron Paul stands for war and a police state, and all have demonstrated their complete and total subservience to Israel. The fact that there is no difference between them is made perfectly clear by the absence of substantive issues in the campaigns of the Republican candidates.

Only Ron Paul deals with real issues, so he is excluded from “debates” in which the other Republican candidates throw mud at one another: “Gingrich voted $60 million to a UN program supporting abortion in China.” “Romney loves to fire people.”

The mindlessness repels.

More importantly, only Ron Paul respects the US Constitution and its protection of civil liberty. Only Ron Paul understands that if the Constitution cannot be resurrected from its public murder by Congress and the executive branch, then Americans are lost to tyranny.

There isn’t much time in which to revive the Constitution. One more presidential term with no habeas corpus and no due process for US citizens and with torture and assassination of US citizens by their own government, and it will be too late. Tyranny will have been firmly institutionalized, and too many Americans from the lowly to the high and mighty will have been implicated in the crimes of the state. Extensive guilt and complicity will make it impossible to restore the accountability of government to law.

If Ron Paul is not elected president in this year’s election, by 2016 American liberty will be in a forgotten grave in a forgotten grave yard.

Having said this, there is no way Ron Paul can be elected, for these reasons:

Not enough Americans understand that the “war on terror” has been used to create a police state. The brainwashed citizenry believe that the police state is making them safe from terrorists.

Liberals, progressives, and the left-wing oppose Ron Paul, claiming that “he would abolish the social safety net, privatize Social Security and Medicare, throw the widows and orphans into the street, abolish the Federal Reserve,” etc.

Apparently, liberals, progressives, and the left-wing do not understand that privatizing Social Security and Medicare and destroying the social safety net are policies that many conservative Republicans favor and are policies that Wall Street is forcing on both political parties. In contrast, a President Ron Paul would be isolated in the White House and would never be able to muster the support of Congress and the powerful interest groups to achieve such radical changes. Moreover, Ron Paul has made it clear that a welfare-free state cannot be achieved by decree but only by creating an economy in which opportunity exists for people to stand on their own feet. Ron Paul has said that he does not support ending welfare before an economy is created that makes a welfare state unnecessary.

Candidate Paul cannot take any steps to reassure Americans that he would not throw them to the mercy of the free market, because his libertarian base would turn on him as another unprincipled politician willing to sacrifice his principles for political expediency. If libertarians were not inflexible, candidate Paul could endorse Ron Unz’s proposal to solve the illegal immigration problem by raising the minimum wage to $12 an hour, so that Americans could afford to work the jobs that are taken by illegals.

Economist James K. Galbraith is probably correct that Unz’s proposal would boost the economy by injecting purchasing power and that the unemployment would be largely confined to illegals who would return to their home country. However, if Ron Paul were to treat Unz’s proposal as one worthy of study and consideration, libertarian ideologues would write him off. Whatever liberal/progressive support he gained would be offset by the loss of his libertarian base.

Why can’t libertarians be as intelligent as Ron Unz and see that if the Constitution is lost all that remains is tyranny?

In short, Americans cannot see beyond their ideologies to the real issue, which is the choice between the Constitution and tyranny.

So we hear absurd accusations that Ron Paul, a libertarian “is a racist.” “Ron Paul is an anti-semite.” “Ron Paul would favor the rich and hurt the poor.”

We don’t hear “Ron Paul would restore and protect the US Constitution.”

What do Americans think life will be like in the absence of the Constitution? I will tell you what it will be like, but first let’s consider the obstacles Ron Paul would face if he were to win the Republican nomination and if he were to be elected president.

In my opinion, if Ron Paul were to win the Republican nomination, the Republican Party would conspire to refuse it to him. The party would simply nominate a different candidate.

If despite everything, Ron Paul were to end up in the White House, he would not be able to form a government that would support his policies. Appointments to cabinet secretaries and assistant secretaries that would support his policies could not be confirmed by the US Senate. President Paul would have to appoint whomever the Senate would confirm in order to form a government. The Senate’s appointees would undermine his policies.

What a President Ron Paul could do, assuming Congress, controlled by powerful private interest groups, did not impeach him on trumped up charges, would be to use whatever forums that might be permitted him to explain to the public, judges, and law schools that the danger from terrorists is miniscule compared to the danger from a government unaccountable to law and the Constitution.

The reason we should vote for Ron Paul is to signal to the powers that be that we understand what they are doing to us. If Paul were to receive a large vote, it could have two good effects. One could be to introduce some caution into the establishment that would slow the march into more war and tyranny. The other is it would signal to Washington’s European and Japanese puppets that not all Americans are stupid sheep. Such an indication could make Washington’s puppet states more cautious and less cooperative with Washington’s drive for world hegemony.

What America Without the Constitution Will Be Like

In the January 4 Huff Post, attorney and author John Whitehead reported on the militarization of local police. Some police forces are now equipped with spy drones. Whitehead reports that a drone manufacturer, AeroVironment Inc., plans to sell 18,000 drones to police departments throughout the country. The company is also advertising a small drone, the “Switchblade,” which can track a person, land on the person and explode.

How long before Americans will be spied upon or murdered as extremists at the discretion of local police?

Recognizing the privacy danger, if not the murder danger, the American Civil Liberties Union has issued a report, “Protecting Privacy From Aerial Surveillance.” https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/protectingprivacyfromaerialsurveillance.pdf

The ACLU believes, correctly, that liberty is threatened by “a surveillance society in which our every move is monitored, tracked, recorded, and scrutinized by authorities.”

The ACLU calls on Congress to legislate privacy protections against the police use of drones. I support the ACLU because it is the most important defender of civil liberty despite other misguided activities, but I wonder what the ACLU is thinking. Congress and the federal courts have already acquiesced in the federal government’s warrantless spying on Americans by the National Security Agency. The Bush regime violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act many times, and all involved, including President Bush, should have been sent to prison for many lifetimes, as each violation carries a 5-year prison term. But the executive branch emerged scot free. No one was held accountable for clear violations of US statutory law.

The ACLU might think that although the federal executive branch has successfully elevated itself above the law, state and local police forces are still accountable. We must hope that they are, but I doubt it.

The militarization of local police has received some attention. What has not received attention is that state and local police are also being federalized. It is not only military armaments and spy technology that local police are receiving from Washington, but also an attitude toward the public along with federal oversight and the collaboration that goes with it. When Homeland Security, a federal police force, comes into states, as I know has occurred in Georgia and Tennessee, and doubtless other states, and together with the state police stop cars and trucks on Interstate highways and subject them to warrantless searches, what is happening is the de facto deputizing of the state police by Homeland Security. This is the way that Goering and Himmler federalized into the Gestapo the independent police forces of German provinces such as Prussia and Bavaria.

Homeland Security has expanded its warrantless searches far beyond “airline security.” The budding gestapo agency now conducts warrantless searches on the nation’s highways, on bus and train passengers, and at Social Security offices. On Tuesday January 3, 2012, the Social Security office in Leesburg, Florida, apparently a terrorist hotspot, became a Homeland Security checkpoint. The DHS Gestapo armed with automatic weapons and sniffer dogs demanded IDs from local residents visiting their local Social Security office. http://www.dailycommercial.com/News/LakeCounty/010412shield

Thomas Milligan, district manager for the Social Security Administration office, said staff were not informed their offices were about to be stormed by armed federal police officers. DHS officials refused to answer questions asked by local media and left with no explanation at noon, reports infowars.com.

The DHS gestapo justified its takeover of a Leesburg Florida Social Security office as being an integral part of “Operational Shield,” conducted by the Federal Protective Service to detect “the presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities.”

One wonders if even brainwashed flag-waving “superpatriots” can miss the message. The Social Security office of Leesburg, Florida, population 19,086 in central Florida is not a place where terrorists devoid of proper ID might be visiting. To protect America from the scant possibility that terrorists might be congregating at the Leesburg Social Security office, the tyrants in Washington sent the Federal Protective Service at who knows what cost to demand ID from locals visiting their Social Security office.

What is this all about except to establish the precedent that federal police, a new entity in American life, the Federal Protective Service, has authority over state and local police offices and can appear out of the blue to interrogate local citizens.

Why the ACLU thinks it is going to get any action out of a Congress that has accommodated the executive branch’s destruction of habeas corpus, due process, and the constitutional and legal prohibitions against torture is beyond me. But at least the issue is raised. But don’t expect to hear about it from the “mainstream media.”

Americans in 2012, although only a few are aware, live in a concentration camp that is far better controlled than the one portrayed by George Orwell in 1984. Orwell, writing in the late 1940s could not imagine the technology that makes control of populations so thorough as it is today. Orwell’s protagonist could at least have hope. In 2012 with the erasure of privacy by the US government, protagonists can be eliminated by hummingbird-sized drones before they can initiate a protest, much less a rebellion.

Never in human history has a people been so easily and willingly controlled by a hostile government as Americans, who are the least free people on earth. And a large percentage of Americans still wave the flag and chant USA! USA! USA!

The Bush regime operated as if the Constitution did not exist. Any semblance of constitutional government that remained after the Bush years was terminated when Congress passed and President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act. One wonders how the National Rifle Association, the defender of the Second Amendment, will now fare. If there is no Constitution, how can there be a Second Amendment? If the President, at his discretion, can set aside habeas corpus and due process and murder citizens based on unproven suspicions, why can’t he set aside the Second Amendment?

Indeed, it is folly to expect a police state to tolerate an armed population.

The NRA is very supportive of the police and military. Now that these armed organizations are being turned against the public, how will the NRA adjust its posture?

Many NRA members, pointing to the “Oath Keepers,” former members of the military who pledge to defend the Constitution, and to police chiefs who support the Second Amendment, believe that the police and military will disobey orders to attack citizens. But we already witness constantly the gratuitous brutality of “our” police against peaceful protesters. We witness military troops all over the world murder citizens who protest government abuses. Why can’t it happen here?

If you don’t want it to happen here, you had better figure out some way to get Ron Paul into the Presidency and to get him a cabinet and subcabinet that will support him.

Meanwhile, the police state grows. On January 4, 2012, the Obama regime announced by decree, not by legislation, the creation of the Bureau of Counterterrorism which will among other tasks “seek to strengthen homeland security, countering violent extremism.” http://newsok.com/obama-launches-bureau-of-counterterrorism/article/feed/332475

Take a moment to think. Do you know of any “violent extremism” happening in the US? The regime is telling you that it needs a new police bureau with unaccountable powers to “strengthen homeland security” against a nonexistent bogyman.

So who will be the violent extremists who require countering by the Bureau of Counterterrorism? It will be peace activists, the Occupy Wall Street protesters, the unemployed and foreclosed homeless. It will be whoever the police state says. And there is no due process or recourse to law.

Given the facts before you, you are out of your mind if you think Ron Paul’s rhetoric against the welfare state is more important than his defense of liberty.

Thank you for urging your members of Congress to reject the Internet Blacklist Legislation (PROTECT-IP in the Senate and SOPA in the House). We've got big news. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has just declared that he is postponing a vote on the Protect IP Act (PIPA) scheduled for Tuesday. And in the House of Representatives, Rep. Lamar Smith issued a statement conceding the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) wasn't ready for prime time either.

The blacklist bills are falling to pieces as we speak.

And it's all thanks to you. Our members took part in one of the largest online protests in history. Over 100,000 websites went black as citizens sent millions of emails to Congress to show opposition to the blacklist bills. The EFF action platform generated over 1 million emails to Congress in a single day.

Congress heard you. Our elected officials are learning that online censorship regimes won't solve the "piracy" problem, and we're not going to let up. When it comes to sacrificing our rights to publish and access information online, there can be no compromise. "Piracy" is a business problem that needs a business solution, not lopsided legislation that favors big content industries over our Constitutional rights.

If you believe that is the end of this, you need help!

Tell them you don’t want a compromise, you want them to KILL THE BILL!

Below is enough information for you to know what this is all about, before you contact your Congress Critters and Senaturds.

Click the links and read the articles then follow the instructions on how to contact them in the Open Congress article.

US Internet piracy case brings New Zealand arrests … New Zealand—With 150 million registered users, about 50 million hits daily and endorsements from music superstars, Megaupload.com was among the world's biggest file-sharing sites. Big enough, according to a U.S. indictment, that it earned founder Kim Dotcom $42 million last year alone. The movie industry howled that the site was making money off pirated material. Though the company is based in Hong Kong and Dotcom was living in New Zealand, some of the alleged pirated content was hosted on leased servers in Virginia, and that was enough for U.S. prosecutors to act. The site was shut down Thursday, and Dotcom and three Megaupload employees were arrested in New Zealand on U.S. accusations that they facilitated millions of illegal downloads of films, music and other content, costing copyright holders at least $500 million in lost revenue. New Zealand Police also seized guns, artwork, more than $8 million in cash and luxury cars valued at nearly $5 million after serving 10 search warrants at several businesses and homes around the city of Auckland. – AP

Dominant Social Theme: Once again, state justice strikes. Thanks goodness Hollywood had the clout to bring the US government to bear on Megaupload. They've destroyed it utterly even without a trial. This is much more efficient for the aggrieved, though less so for the accused.

Free-Market Analysis: How is it that Hollywood has to bring the massive force of the US government to bear on a private company?Megaupload.com is in ruins now. Its top people are arrested, its website shut down and its assets confiscated. At whose bidding is this done?

Even were Megaupload to have participated in grievously incorrect activities, why is it that the company is to be ruined before it can make its case? Is that how justice is supposed to work in the modern era? Legal counsel for the firm already pointed out that the case is probably civil rather than criminal. But nonetheless a criminal case has been brought – with all the resultant destruction. Why?

Well … obviously, to ruin Magaupload and its business model. The proximate cause of destruction will be "Hollywood," of course. Those on the Left shall note that corporate greed took down an information-sharing website that was possibly doing no wrong.

But, of course, it runs far deeper than that. As we've long pointed out, the Anglospherepower elite that wants to rule the world is having a good deal of trouble grappling with the Internet. In Western societies, given the civil traditions of liberty and entrepreneurialism, it is very difficult to shut down entire industries, let alone ones that are perceived as leading the way for human development and understanding.

Thus, the elites must formulate justifications for what they are doing and create "precedents." This idea of precedent justice is a doozy of a dominant social theme. Inevitably, as we have pointed out, it can only end up with half the population of a given country in jail and the other half operating as prison guards.

Precedent, after all, rarely reverses itself. It is in a sense part of the larger Hegelian Dialectic that the power elite loves to employ to move the sociopolitical and economic conversation toward more authoritarianism.

When it comes to modern "justice," the Hegelian Dialectic is sweet and simple. Two lawyers make a case and then the judge decides. Over time, given the bias of the system, the punishments grow incrementally larger, the amount of activity necessary to commit a crime shrinks and the authority given to prosecutors (and judges) expands.

It is … natural. It is a result of the dialectic. It can end up in no other way. And that's why state-monopoly justice is an essentially crooked dominant social theme. It's advanced as "impartial" but in fact – as with so much government verbiage – it actually acts in the opposite way.

State monopoly justice cannot be other than biased because those involved all work for the state and have a stake in expanding their jobs, salaries, pensions and perks. One only does this by expanding one's responsibilities. When it comes to "justice," those involved are constantly engaged in criminalizing more and more activities. Human nature.

Most people cannot conceive there can be any other kind of justice than the current kind. But we have long argued that as entrenched as the dominant social theme is, it will come under increasing scrutiny as what we call the Internet Reformation proceeds.

Just as the state's other memes are coming under question – the fear-based promotions that frighten middle classes into giving wealth and power to global repositories – so the "state-justice" meme shall come under fire, sooner or later.

In fact, we would argue the battle has already been joined on this issue of copyright infringement. We've also enunciated a practical perspective that we believe would resolve the issue in a pertinent and appropriate way. Let those who are OFFENDED by copyright infringement enforce their copyright themselves!

Let them use their OWN assets to enforce their position. Why should Hollywood moguls and the people they work for (Money Power itself) use the assets and force of the state to enforce an arguable proposition?

We can certainly admit that Hollywood, in aggregate, has a point. Hollywood created a product and has sold the product with the proviso that any repeated viewing of the product by alternative second or third parties is illegal.

So far, so good. If that's the case, and Hollywood believes itself aggrieved, let Hollywood enforce its claim! Let Hollywood use its own funds to sort out what's actually going on and why. How does Hollywood manage to dragoon the massive powers of the United States into busting up an entire corporation and arresting its workers around the world?

Doesn't make much sense to us. But we've been arguing for privatized justice for a while now. If you have an issue with someone, take it up with THEM. Especially when it comes to "white collar" business matters.

Of course, the answer will come back that private justice will not provide even restitution. In other words, the quality of the justice will be uneven. To this we respond: You're kidding, aren't you?

Megaupload is a good example of why "public" state-generated justice is hopelessly unjust. It is not justice at all when the FBI, Interpol and other US/British-sponsored facilities impound the instruments of your livelihood and your assets without even the beginnings of a trial.

It was not justice when Amanda Knox was pursued for years by an Italian prosecutorial staff that did not want to admit a mistake (see What Amanda Knox Tells Us About Justice). It is not justice in the US that so many are put to death that DNA evidence would now exculpate.

It is not justice in the US (especially) that one of every three Americans is exposed to some sort of criminal charge before the age of 25. It is not justice that four to six million US citizens are in jail at any given time in any increasingly "privatized" Gulag that hands the keys over to "efficient" penitentiary specialists that utilize inmates as so much slave labor.

Megaupload is just the latest corporation to feel the brutality of early 21st century state-run justice. The point, of course, (in our view) is not actually to provide "justice" so much as to make people fearful of using the Internet and sharing information that may someday be deemed "criminal."

In fact, copyright laws were developed by royalty to counteract the spread of information (in books) after the invention of the Gutenberg Press. The same tactics that applied then are being applied now. War, authoritarian legislation and copyright infringement are all tools of this particular elite that we have been saddled with.

But as we often point out, the Gutenberg Press itself radically reshaped the Western world and we have no reason to think the Internet Reformation is not going to do likewise.

In the video below, you can hear about the exploits of Anonymous in reaction to what the US Feds just did to Megaupload. While we have a suspicion that Anonymous itself is a kind of false flag, the larger issue is that the Internet is not nearly so controllable as people make it out to be, in our humble opinion.

These cutting-edge technologies tend to get used up, to get utilized until their initial utility is "maxed out." That's instinct and has nothing to do with any putative elite control. That's what the elite is up against when it comes to trying "manage" the Internet and reduce its impact. Good luck.

OPEN CONGRESS BLOG

Hello all,

On Wednesday, January 18th, OpenCongress is proud to join the global online action against the “PIPA” Internet censorship bill. We’re voluntarily restricting access to OpenCongress to protest PIPA (S. 968) and its House companion bill, “SOPA” (H.R. 3261) — together, the worst Internet legislation in history.

PIPA is an existential threat to our mission of public education through technology and free political speech online. The Internet is the most important innovation of our time for a truly representative democracy. PIPA establishes a dangerous legal framework for censorship of sites like OpenCongress, which brings together data about what’s happening in government from a wide variety of sources.

If you value OpenCongress and the information we provide, call the D.C. offices of your U.S. senators and urge them to vote against PIPA. Find your senators’ phone numbers and step-by-step calling instructions here: whip the Senate against PIPA.

PIPA is a perfect, egregious example of systemic corruption in the U.S. Congress and how corporate money directs the political process. It is vital that the public registers our opposition before the Senate rushes to vote on PIPA as soon as it returns next week, Tuesday, January 24th.

Remember that sopa is in the house and pipa is in the senate, and the internet is the only possible way to change our government, tell them to keep their slimy hands off of it. This delay is a tactic to form a compromise, that will allow them future revisions, and old Harry is a born and proven liar.

On Wednesday, January 18th, OpenCongress is proud to join the global online action against the "PIPA" Internet censorship bill. We're voluntarily restricting access to OpenCongress to protest PIPA (S. 968) and its House companion bill, "SOPA" (H.R. 3261) — together, the worst Internet legislation in history.

PIPA is an existential threat to our mission of public education through technology and free political speech online. The Internet is the most important innovation of our time for a truly representative democracy. PIPA establishes a dangerous legal framework for censorship of sites like OpenCongress, which brings together data about what's happening in government from a wide variety of sources.

If you value OpenCongress and the information we provide, call the D.C. offices of your U.S. senators and urge them to vote against PIPA. Find your senators' phone numbers and step-by-step calling instructions here: whip the Senate against PIPA.

PIPA is a perfect, egregious example of systemic corruption in the U.S. Congress and how corporate money directs the political process. It is vital that the public registers our opposition before the Senate rushes to vote on PIPA as soon as it returns next week, Tuesday, January 24th.

It looks like Greece is about to completely default and be ejected from the European Union. If the majority of the pundits' fears prove true, it will result in a domino-effect for Italy, Portugal and Spain, among a few others. As a result, the actual and psychological effect could very well cause the Stock Market to plummet, but unlike the ups & downs that normally occur, this time I see the Market falling — and keep falling. If you are invested in stocks in any way, be it a 401k or a regular stock portfolio, you could lose a lot of money that will not come back as it has in the past. The European economic disaster is going to drag the entire world economy down with it, including the U.S. and even China.

The Occupy Movement people don't really understand the exact cause of their pain, which is why in interviews, the protesters seem to be just plain angry at everything in general. Principally, they are angry because they don't have jobs waiting for them upon graduating college, instead being socked with a nasty student loan they can never file bankruptcy against — or pay off. If you ask the average Occupy protester how he or she feels about former President Bill Clinton, nine out of ten would gush praise for the man, yet it was President Clinton who in 1994 signed the free trade agreement called NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. It was that act which set into motion all the problems facing the United States today, but because it took so long to have a felt effect on the majority of Americans, nobody remembers Ross Perot's dire and dead-on accurate warning that prime, family wage-paying jobs would leave the United States en masse. The job losses didn't sweep America right away, so Americans went about their lives not realizing NAFTA was the most destructive and treasonous act ever committed against the United States and its citizens. Just to show you how uninformed people are, the last time I saw an approval rating for former President Clinton, it was a solid 55% — far more than our current president has. That is how sadly ignorant the average American is.

Now here is where it gets interesting: Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law against the wishes of his own Democrats! That's right, Occupy protesters, your demi-god Bill Clinton entered into an unholy alliance with corporate-lap dog congressional Republicans to set America on its path to ultimate economic destruction which just might manifest itself in a huge way this coming week beginning January 16, 2012. It was President Clinton and the Republicans who caused this flaming disaster, and nobody is writing about it except a few people like me — and Ron Paul.

What led to NAFTA was pure greed on the part of corporate America. In order to take advantage of low labor costs in other nations, the trade protections and tariffs that protected highly paid American workers from unfair foreign competition were dropped with the enactment of NAFTA. The moment those trade protections were eliminated, our large, multi-national corporations went to work building manufacturing plants in China, Mexico, Indonesia, etc. Once those manufacturing plants were complete and low-paid foreign employees hired and trained, our corporations began laying off their American labor force and closed up nearly every American manufacturing plant.

Many people blame the corporations for their greed-lust and their lack of patriotism, but that is because they never understood that corporations have but one duty under the law, and that is to provide the highest, legally earned profits for their shareholders that they can garner. Prior to the enactment of NAFTA, it was unprofitable to manufacture in foreign nations and export the products to the U.S. due to the tariffs and other trade protections that forced the retail cost of foreign-made products to be as expensive as the higher-quality American products being produced. But after NAFTA was signed into law, it would have been foolish (and arguably illegal) for any American corporate manufacturer to remain in the USA. NAFTA allowed American manufacturers to take their trade secrets and technology with them when they began manufacturing offshore, and that allowed them to produce products of the same quality as were made in the U.S. previously, but at a much lower cost. Thus, corporate profits soared, and so did the Stock Market.

The rise in the American Stock Market was misinterpreted by many to think America was just as prosperous after NAFTA as it was before NAFTA, but the profits produced were being earned in other nations instead of the U.S. In the meantime, Americans were being laid off here and there, and it was that gradual degradation of the American job market and the eventual downturn of the economy itself that escaped the attention of most Americans who blithely and ignorantly went to work every day thinking all was just as well as it had ever been. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The enactment of NAFTA was similar to exploding a relatively small bomb inside a large dam. It created a small crack in our economy that didn't seem threatening at first, but the profits that once flowed to the United States and its people through investment and employment very gradually flowed through the NAFTA-caused cracks to benefit just about every other nation BUT the United States, and the American job losses have finally reached the point where every American knows several people who are unemployed and in dire financial straits. The negative effects of NAFTA took so long to manifest themselves (18 years) that few Americans realize today that it wasn't the housing bubble or big corporate and bank bail-outs that caused all this, but NAFTA.

You see, once people began losing jobs, they still had good credit and they still had credit cards, so it wasn't apparent to their neighbors that they were struggling. About that time, the housing bubble was beginning to brew, so many people who thought the job losses were just a hick-up that would pass began supplementing their income needs by filling up their credit cards and making very dangerous investments flipping houses, often refinancing the homes they lived in to the max so they had the cash to flip homes. But when the housing bubble burst, those same people were left holding real estate they couldn't flip, and because they had refinanced all the equity from their residential homes to come up with the down-payment cash on those shoddy, dangerous investments, they lost not only the homes they hoped to flip, but their own homes as well.

Next, here comes the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Government to bail out most of the banks and investment houses who faced complete financial annihilation because they were left holding all the properties being abandoned by the former individual investor/flippers to foreclosure. With high unemployment easily topping 20% in real life terms and a housing market flooded with foreclosed homes offered at ever dropping prices, the "regular" housing market prices are being depressed to compete for a dwindling number of qualified home buyers.

All this, every bit of it, stems from the enactment of NAFTA in 1994, and the water has been slipping through the cracks ever since, but at a faster and faster flow until we have finally reached the point most people only now realize the damage it caused. NAFTA started the whole thing. NAFTA gutted the United States of America, cost millions of jobs and the only beneficiaries of NAFTA were and are the multinational corporations, most of which were born and bred right here in the good ol' USA.

The powers that put NAFTA into motion are the same powers that are committed to seeing Mitt Romney succeed as the Republican nominee, because Romney is a big corporate guy and they know they can control Romney. Barack Obama has received millions of dollars in campaign contributions from multi-national corporations domiciled in the United States for exactly the same reasons. Both Obama and Romney are playing along with Wall Street, so the powers that be will be happy if either one wins. Ron Paul, however, scares Wall Street to death, and for very understandable reasons.

Ron Paul will stop all this nonsense in its tracks, IF he gets elected. There is a lot of money riding on this election because the very few wealthy 1% or whatever they want to be called, got that massive wealth as a direct result of the implementation of NAFTA, and they would like that trend to continue no matter what happens to the rest of the 99% left floundering in America.

If they only knew the truth, every Occupy Movement sympathizer would realize Ron Paul is the only candidate they NEED to vote for, regardless of who they think they want to vote for. Romney is prettier, so a lot of women will vote for him on that basis alone. Obama claims to be the champion of the Middle Class, and he's fooled a lot of liberals to support him at the same time he's accepting fat campaign checks from the same corporations the Occupy people want to burn down, yet the Occupy people largely support Obama anyway. No wonder they aren't getting any respect.

I just sent Ron Paul a check for $200.00. I hope he buys a decent bullet-proof vest with it, because I think he might need it.

I noticed this first per Massachusetts. The State consolidated control and ownership of all counties in the state by merger of all counties into the State. This happened over a decade ago in Massachusetts.

The 'kicker" in addition to merger of the counties the "State" before this was done the "State" changed their government status from the "State" government of Massachusetts to the "Commonwealth" of Massachusetts. This transition was implemented by the "State" prior to 1995.

The big point here is that: "Private Associations" were used over the last 75-years to transition local governments from what we use to know government as into "Corporate" for profit enterprises and did so by direct consult over the years.

The structure of the "Commonwealth" of Massachusetts over the "State" government of Massachusetts, at the stroke of the pen overseen and checked off on by key player "Attorneys", implemented the transition from a "government" entity into what could be more closely considered a "Private Association".

The implications here are grave specifically as would apply to the transfer and masking of public wealth. The People own government, they do not own private associations. The same would apply to wealth transferred from "State" holdings transitioned into the "Private Association" holdings of the "Commonwealth" of Massachusetts..

Leave the liabilities under the "State" government shell and transfer the wealth holdings to and under the "Commonwealth" association.

This was done right under the noses of the Massachusetts residents and done without a clue given that it was being done to the Peoples of Massachusetts. The same is covertly taking place in NJ, PA, CT, and many other states.

The shell structure of government is being left in place as the wealth and stewardship responsibilities are transferred to the Private Association, or as in Massachusetts case when transitioned from the "State" government of Massachusetts into the "Commonwealth" of Massachusetts.

When this transition took place about two decade ago, Massachusetts no longer produced a "State" government CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report). The CAFR was now produced under the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The State Court System and Financial operations were also transitioned into and under the same "Commonwealth" structure.

Mit Romney is the Presidential pick to be promoted by the syndicate being the prior governor of Massachusetts. He is versed on operating procedure to implement the same nationally. That will be his primary mission if elected President and thus the Syndicate is moving forward full steam utilizing all of their contacts and tactics to force Mitt Romney's win as President.

I note Barack Obama as an attorney and current President is attempting to consolidate through restructuring federal government into the same transition.

This communication needs to go viral in all circles. Let all comprehend what is taking place right in their face and under their noses.

For government to be: "For the People by the People" this transition needs to be stopped cold in its tracks and reversed. It is well under way and if the roots of its structure hold it will no longer be: "For the People by the People" but For the Association by the Association" under the direction of the association's minions of attorneys direction.

As quoted from the front page of CAFR1.com as the bottom line at the end of the page:

"It appears that many attorneys have now taken over the House, Senate, and Governor's office. The separation of powers doctrine mandates attorneys being officers of the court (Judicial branch) that they should not be able to run for public office (Executive / Administrative branch)

Stop this now!

The ROOT of the corruption / graft / destruction of our country is coming from this breeding grounds. Here is why you are being bled dry! The very corrupt from the judicial branch have slithered their way into elected and appointed positions within the executive / administrative areas of government.

Again, it is the nature of this beast to bleed you dry, if they can that is..

If you from this point forward VOTE for an attorney running for office, you are more than foolish, you aid in the assured degradation and plunder of your own country.

Remove these attorneys from public office NOW! Mandate a ten year lapse from being an officer of the court BEFORE an attorney can run for public office and ten years after leaving office. This is a must to do NOW. It is NOT an option. Make this the LAW NOW in your City, County, and State. You now know why you are being bled dry. It is the NATURE of this beast.

THEY SAY THIS IS A COUNTRY OF LAWS, WELL, WHEN THE LAW ITSELF IS LAWLESS BY APPLICATION AND WHEN THE INTENT OF THE LAW IS FOR EXTORTION OF WEALTH OR REPRISAL OVER PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE, THEN THE LETTER OF THE LAW ITSELF BECOMES MUTE AND THE APPLICATION THEREOF A CRIME IN ITSELF TO BE REPUDIATED.

——-FOOTER NOTE——

Per understanding CAFRs, people have been intentionally kept in the dark so long they forget the basics:

1. A "Budget Report" is a selective funding of x accounts from x resources (set up to be primarily funded with taxation and done so "for the year")

2. An "Annual Financial Report" is the showing of "all" income: Investment; taxation; and Enterprise, plus the "accumulated wealth over decades. Budgets are for the year, an AFR is for it all since creation of the entity.

There is a big difference between the two. A correct analogy would be: The budget to operate your house vs. your statement of net worth.

The public has been played with the biggest shell game of selective presentation there is allowing for massive fortunes to be made by the inside players over the last several decades..

Every investment fund large and small is a power base. Where that money is invested determines what company; real-estate venture, etc., is made or broken. Thus in line with that, never a mention of the 184,000 AFRs of the corresponding local governments..nor the many thousands of specialty investment funds they contain. I note gov pension funds facilitate the same. Paying employee benefits from the return on the funds is an after thought for the government players.

The head communists back in the 30's and 40's said they could take over America without firming a shot. The undercurrents of that statement were that they could depend on the greed and opportunity of the players to accomplish that goal and it did. US Collective government since 2000 brings in more gross income than the entire gross income of the population of the United States.

Taxation is rammed down the public's throat (1/3rd of the gross income) and Investment / Enterprise income (2/3rd of the gross income) the "silence is golden" rule is strictly enforced with the full symbiotic cooperation of the syndicated media; controlled education; and both political parties as applies over the last century.

WJB"

Sent FYI and for your action from,

Walter Burien – CAFR1

P. O. Box 2112

Saint Johns, AZ 85936

Tel. (928) 458-5854

Any local government can be restructured to meet their annual budget needs "Without" taxes. TRF (Tax Retirement Funds) providing the revenue source to pay every City, County, State’s general purpose annual budgetary needs!

Congress critters (1) do not write bills, (2) do not read bills, (3) and do not listen to constituents who do not put lots of money into their campaign coffers. Their ONLY objective is to get re-elected, which guarantees their Pension FOR LIFE, which kicks in after 6 years of service. The Caucus leaders tell them which bills to promote, and they control who gets reelected.

BOTTOMLINE: "Representation" by congress is a false concept and does not exist. End the fairytale in your mind.

(LONE STAR WATCHDOG) The Author is unknown. This Flyer is being passed out on people’s windshields in Montana in response to NDAA. This declaration might be a setup to see who will take up arms or it could be sincere. To get a PDF copy CLICK HERE

This is a scanned and OCRed MS Word copy of the declaration of war.

01 17 12 A DECLARATION

Whereas, on the 14"' of December, 2011, the House of Representatives of these United States voted, in the form of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, in favor of indefinite military detention, without charges, of American citizens on American soil, without due process of law, at the discretion of the government alone;

Whereas, on the 15th of December, 2011, the Senate of these United States voted in favor of the same bill;

Whereas, on the 31 ~ of December, 2011, the President of these United States signed the same bill into law;

Whereas, the proscription against the use of military force to police the populace has been an essential feature of American civic life and civic liberty since the arrival of our civilization upon this continent;

Whereas, the wanton violation of this proscription was one of the chief causes of the separation of the American people from their government in Great Britain;

Whereas, the Constitution so chartering the government of these United States, in Article III Section III, states that "No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

Whereas, the Constitution so chartering the government of these United States, in the Fifth Amendment, states that no person shall be "deprived o/life, liberty, or property, without dueprocess of law";

Whereas, the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the President of these United States have disregarded the plain text of the Constitution;

Whereas, in openly disregarding its founding document, the government ofthese United States has lost any semblance of legitimacy;

Whereas, the use of such draconian measures has been an essential feature of the enforcement of tyranny by every totalitarian government of the 20th century;

Whereas, the use of such draconian measures is carefully calculated to quash all political dissent amongst a captive people;

Whereas, the codification of such draconian measures effectively nullifies all civil liberties the people may hope to hold;

And whereas, the codification of such draconian measures is an act of war against the populace at large;

Therefore, be it declared that a STATE OF WAR formally exists between the Government of these United States and the People of these United States, perpetrated by that Government against the People.

We, the People of these United States, declare any and all attempts to enforce the provisions of the NDAA to be unlawful, void, and of no force.

We declare ALL WHO voted in favor of the NDAA, and ALL WHO attempt to enforce the NDAA to be traitors to these United States, punishable under law.

We SHALL DISOBEY, APPREHEND, OR RESIST WITH FORCE, at our discretion, any person who attempts to enforce the provisions of the NDAA.

We SHALL NOT aggress against any Federal, State or local government employee who shall not attempt to enforce or aid and abet the enforcement of the NDAA, they being as trapped as the rest of the populace.

Such STATE OF WAR shall continue until the NDAA is stricken from the code of law, and all who had a hand in the NDAA are removed from positions of power.

DISCLAIMER

The above information was collected from the internet, and distributed for information purpose only, and does not represent the intent to promote violence by James P. Harvey or any of his web sites, or news letters.

It is my belief that this present government is actively planting information on the net as an excuse to declare martial law and every citizen needs to see evidence of it.

HINT: Why is the author’s name or organization excluded?

Comments Off on A Declaration Flyer Being Passed out in Montana As a Result of NDAA

The outrage continues over the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) passed by the U.S. Senate. Those political animals have confirmed rotten, activist judges for decades destroying our lives and that includes the U.S. Supreme Court. Dr. Richard Cordero put together an extensive collection of evidence to politically correct, Justice Sonia Sotomayor is guilty of fraud and a participant in a cover-up in concealing assets as part of a judicially run and tolerated bankruptcy fraud scheme.

Sotomayor lied through omission on her original sworn statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee and even though she made a correction, she continued to lie about a condo she owns in Florida. Webofdeception.org uncovered the documents.

Despite all the hard proof, the Senate Judiciary still confirmed an individual who should have been indicted by a federal grand jury; the statute of limitations has probably now run out. The U.S. Senate was too cowardly to deny Sotomayor a seat on the court because of her ethnicity and back lash by special interest voting blocs.

On May 17, 2012, those poltroons once again voted like lunatics: "The Senate voted yesterday to allow illegal aliens to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal employment — even if the job was obtained through forged or stolen documents." Yes, illegal employment are the key words, but you can bet any senator who voted for it will get votes from millions of illegal aliens who are voting – illegally.

One can fill a book with anti-American, unconstitutional bills and treaties passed by the U.S. Senate in my lifetime. Like the U.S. House of Representatives, they continue to vote massive borrowed dollars for unconstitutional cabinets like the EPA, the Federal Department of Education, foreign aid and more – without a scintilla of legal authority to do so.

This issue is both constitutional and legal. First let me address the issue of what the Seventeenth Amendment is for those who might not know: It was a proposed constitutional amendment which would allow election of U.S. Senators by the people. Of course, this is 1,000 percent the opposite of those wise men who birthed this constitutional republic.

3. Resolved, that the National Legislature ought to consist of two branches.

4. Resolved, that the member of the first branch of the National Legislature ought to be elected by the people of the several States every _____ for the term of _____; to be of the age of ____years at least and so forth.

5. Resolved, that the members of the second branch of the National Legislature ought to be elected by those of the first, out of a proper number of persons nominated by the individual Legislatures, to be of the age of ____ years at least and so forth.

The framers of the Constitution wisely understood the absolute necessity of ensuring we the people would have the right to vote for our representative in Congress, and at the same time because they all jealously guarded freedom and liberty, the states must also have equal representation. We the people would have the ability to remove via the ballot box, miscreants and scoundrels, while the state legislatures could recall their U.S. Senators who acted against the best interests of their state.

The Senate was supposed to be a sort of checks and balances, but that noble concept disappeared when U.S. Senators were then voted into office by special interests and mobs demanding more and more from the people's treasury. The absolute right of the states to equal representation was wiped out when the Seventeenth Amendment was declared ratified on April 8, 1913.

The level of ignorance on this issue shocks even me. I once read a comment below a news item regarding former senate candidate, Joe Miller, [R-AK] after he came out supporting a repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment. The useful fool who submitted the comment said old Joe wouldn't have to run for office and worry about getting beat. Miller's opponent and alleged eventual winner, Lisa Murkowski, RINO, opened the pie hole in her face: "…was the first to criticize Miller's comments, issuing a news release entitled “Joe Miller reaching new extremes every day.”

“We have seen Joe Miller take some extraordinary positions in this campaign, but I never imagined he would support disenfranchising himself and every other Alaskan,” Murkowski said in a statement. “Joe is no longer content with simply taking away federal support for Alaskan families, now he wants to take away their right to select our United States senators.”

Yeah, those who gave their lives and blood to create this republic reached "new extremes" when they voted to create two separate bodies for the U.S. Congress, one for the people and one for the states.

Think Murkowski wants to give up her power as a U.S. Senator? When pig's fly. That foolish hen votes for legislation that affects my life and I can't vote her out of office. Another dangerous female, Olympia Snowe, RINO from Maine, voted for the unconstitutional Obamacare declaring her constituents wanted it! Well, I'm not her constituent and I sure as hell don't want it. The vile, Charles Schumer, [D-NY] would like to see the Second Amendment wiped off the books and every time he votes for a bill, I have no way to send his "progressive" backside packing.

The U.S. Senate over the years has ratified treaties killing nearly eight million good paying jobs sending them overseas. This has had a direct impact upon the states as far as growth, unemployment and so many problems, it would take fifty columns to cover. All because of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that was not ratified by the necessary number of states at the time – 36.

I know, there are a lot of groups out there pounding the pavement begging the outlaws in the U.S. Congress to repeal that amendment. No. How many more lies are we going to support? It sickens me to think about the lies from Pearl Harbor to the Bay of Tonkin, KAL 007, the OKC bombing, 9/11, you name it. How many more lies do we cover up instead of standing up for the truth and dealing with it?

The truth is the outlaws in the U.S. Congress are not going to repeal that amendment even if it were legally ratified. House members want a senate seat and senators want the White House.

I have been on this fraud for more than 15 long years. Over the course of 2011, I sent a handful of state representatives and a couple senators proof that amendment was not ratified. Really, a massive amount of documentation. I ask if they would file a lawsuit in their official capacity as state legislators to stop any senate candidate or incumbent from being on the ballot in their state; standing would not be an issue. No one has the right to run for the U.S. Senate under a law that does not exist, period.

While not the course I suggested, I thought my prayers were answered when I found out a bill was written and was to be introduced this month in the New Hampshire General Court (Legislature): H.B. 1126 – "This bill requires members of the general court to nominate candidates for United States. senator."

However, last week I felt like I had been sucker punched when I found out from Rep. Davenport that due to a procedural error, the bill will not be introduced this session. I do thank Rep. Davenport and his colleagues for their work which will continue on this issue.

While it is devastating, it's not the end. That bill, should it have been introduced, would have prompted the question: "Wait – we can't do that. The Seventeenth Amendment allows direct election of U.S. senators." That would be true, however, no one can find the vote by California making ratification one state short even if you pooh-pooh away all the errors by states during the ratification process. Bill Benson originally researched the Sixteenth Amendment non ratification nearly 30 years ago; he also did the Seventeenth at the same time. What I have done is back up his research and more. Now many state legislators have it and so do you.

Over the past decade and a half, I've heard the stonewalling and excuses about changes to the amendment made by states: punctuation and actual word changes not mattering. Wrong. More than a decade ago, Constitutional attorney, Larry Becraft, who has more than 35 years experience fighting in federal courts and giving the IRS some of it's worst bloody noses, filed a lawsuit in the State of Oklahoma over the non ratification of the 16th Amendment; known as the federal income tax amendment. He writes:

“Philander Knox was Secretary of State back in 1913 and was by law the public official to whom the States which allegedly ratified this amendment were to send their notices of ratification. When enough of these documents were received by Knox, he commenced a review of them and drafted a report dated February 15, 1913. Therein, Knox noted that "under the provisions of the Constitution a legislature is not authorized to alter in any way the amendment proposed by Congress, the function of the legislature consisting merely in the right to approve or disapprove the proposed amendment." But having said this, Knox went on in the same report and noted all the various changes that the states had made to the amendment.

“This proposition that state legislatures cannot alter or change a proposed constitutional amendment is derived from an establish legal principle which requires that legislative bodies, when considering any given legislative act, must agree to the exact same wording and punctuation of that proposed law. This legislative principle was discussed in a booklet titled How Our Laws Are Made, Document Number 97-120, 97th Congress, First Session, written by Edward F. Willett, Jr., Law Revision Counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives:

"Each amendment must be inserted in precisely the proper place in the bill, with the spelling and punctuation exactly the same as it was adopted by the House. Obviously, it is extremely important that the Senate receive a copy of the bill in the precise form in which it passed the House. The preparation of such a copy is the function of the enrolling clerk.

"When the bill has been agreed to in identical form by both bodies– either without amendment by the Senate, or by House concurrence in the Senate amendments, or by agreement in both houses to the conference report– a copy of the bill is enrolled for presentation to the President.

"The preparation of the enrolled bill is a painstaking and important task since it must reflect precisely the effect of all amendments, either by way of deletion, substitution, or addition, agreed to by both bodies. The enrolling clerk…. must prepare meticulously the final form of the bill, as it was agreed to by both Houses, for presentation to the President…. each (amendment) must be set out in the enrollment exactly as agreed to, and all punctuation must be in accord with the action taken."

Of course, our lawsuit was kicked to the curb by the court and we didn't have enough money (The Wallace Institute) to take it to a higher court. I doubt it would have succeeded because most judges are simply gutless without an ounce of integrity.

I want you to go look at this case: Sullivan vs. U.S., et al. A 2003 case which clearly demonstrates federal judges are too cowardly to stand up for the U.S. Constitution and should be thrown off the bench by Congress. While that case dealt with war and the Monroe Doctrine, read the actual words of Judge James C. Cox, beginning on page 23: “..you would find that a sufficient number of states never ratified that amendment (16th)”. And, "I think I'm correct in saying that actually the ratification never occurred."

According to that judge, it's okay fraud sends Americans to prison. That federal judge spontaneously brought up the Sixteenth Amendment (federal income tax) and clearly stated what Bill Benson proved in his research and went to prison for: it was not properly ratified. How many hundreds, if not thousands are rotting in federal prisons because of a law that does not exist? One too many while the American people dutifully lay bare their personal lives to the IRS in the hope they avoid an audit.

As for the Seventeenth, this needs to be considered: Can a constitutional amendment be constitutional if it amends the Constitution by a back door method?

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose, Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

For those states who voted not to ratify or those who were out of session at the time and didn't vote – the Seventeenth Amendment clearly does as they did not give their consent to be deprived equal suffrage in the Senate. I don't think people can appreciate the battle that went on during the first Continental Congress until they read Max Ferrand's historical work, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787. It's free on the Internet, but I have the three volume soft copy set (1800 pages). It is a remarkable walk through history.

The Seventeenth Amendment clearly violates Article V for the following states who did not ratify the Seventeenth Amendment: Utah (explicitly rejected amendment); Alabama; Florida; Georgia (refused to vote on it); Kentucky; Maryland; Mississippi; Rhode Island; South Carolina; Virginia.

Long ago I focused on this letter given to me in the mid-1990s by an individual with impeccable credentials. As you can see, it is a letter from the the archivist at the Secretary of State's office stating: "There was no debate or voting record listed in the California State Senate or Assembly Journals". On what? The ratification of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments.

It is alleged California voted to ratify the Seventeenth Amendment on January 28, 1913. Next, please look at this journal page I personally retrieved from the California State Archives. 1913. See item 7 regarding the constitutional amendment to elect U.S. Senators: May 20, 1913: From Committee. Without Recommendation. How could it go from committee without recommendation on May 20th if it was allegedly voted on five months earlier? It wasn't.

Over the years, the folks at the California State Archives have been so kind and helpful in my research. This past summer I drove 100 miles to Angelo State U, the closest repository of old records and went through their microfilm. That promoted me to again contact California to request court certified copies of the journal records for 1913. Guess what? They're all on the Internet now and what do those official records from California show for January 28, 1913?

There was no vote that day or any other for the Seventeenth Amendment. I had my web master down load everything and also put it on a CD, which I sent to the state reps and senators listed below. I did it to protect the truth, i.e., a journal page which looks authentic suddenly appears with the proper vote. I knew there was no vote back in 2000 because I went to the California State Archives (15 minutes from my home then) and asked for a search. I went back the next day and was informed by the head archivist no such vote was found.

The Seventeenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (as well as the Sixteenth) was clearly not ratified by enough states. There is also another problem. I tried to obtain an investigation from the State of Georgia, but they don't do mail requests anymore because of budget cuts. I was going to ask Rep. Bobby Franklin to help me, but God, rest his soul, that fine man died unexpectedly on July 26, 2011, from heart disease; I was so shocked. What did I want Bobby to help me with? The State of George did not vote on that amendment. Their governor at the time commissioned an investigation: Congress did not properly adopt the amendment before it was even sent to the states. I printed out everything I could find at Angelo U of the bickering between congress critters at the time and the amendments, but I wish I had a copy of that investigation. State reps and senators can probably get a copy because they are elected officials.

The bottom line is this: We are being destroyed from within. The top issues in this country crushing us are Agenda 21, the unconstitutional "Federal" Reserve and the federal income tax. Our major job sectors gutted because of vile treaties like NAFTA pushed through by then Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. Obamacare and endless new regulations coming out of alphabet soup agencies that are unconstitutional, killing the states and employers. The states have no representation in Congress; they are little more than doormats. The states must stand up and fight back as those representatives were going to in New Hampshire with H.R. 1126 or allow the federal machine to crush them and all of us.

That isn't going to happen until one state takes the first step in challenging the non ratification of that amendment. It may be okay with the federal judge in the Sullivan case that people are rotting in prison for an amendment that wasn't ratified, but it's not okay with me and I hope not okay with you. And, please, I'm sick to death of the mealy mouthed excuses that it can't be done or chaos would ensue or the legislatures would appoint the same flavor of corrupt individuals that keep getting elected by the mobs. I would say Apollo 13 qualified as a situation where chaos might have taken over, but it didn't. Strong minds, professionalism and faith brought those astronauts home.

We are a different nation now than in 1913. We have the power, literally, of the people at the state level to make damn sure those appointed senators represent the rights and interests of the state which benefit all of us or we vote out the state representatives and senators who appointed them. If we truly are to be a nation of self governance, then we have to take control. Those individuals in the state houses work for us, not the other way around.

This will only happen when a few state legislatures go for the cure. Do what Rep. Joshua Davenport did – get a bill introduced THIS session. This is an emergency, so maybe there is some way it can be done in your state. Those counterfeit U.S. Senators are killing jobs, making more and more regulations hurting the rights of your citizens, not to mention our God-given rights. Yes, it IS an emergency as we slide further into the continuing nightmare.

Okay, forget New York, California and states like mine (Texas) who are out of session until Jan. 2013. It would be close to impossible to get a special session called for something so important as fraud and the right of the state to expose it. Every state has its own rules about introducing bills, but if you want something bad enough, it can get done.

Over the years I have been asked to endorse senate candidates; I have refused. I have not voted for a senate candidate since 1996. I will NOT be party to the continuing fraud. No individual has the right to run for the U.S. Senate. I know "senators" like Rand Paul are very popular and if this fraud were exposed, their state legislature can still appoint him to carry on. This is a mess (with both amendments), but by golly, it can be dealt with one step at a time. Or, do we continue to live with lies, fraud and destruction?

No more resolutions asking Congress to pretty please, repeal the Seventeenth Amendment. That will never happen and it's not even the legal way to address this. While I would like to have seen a few state legislators challenge ballot access, too many state judges are cowards just like federal judges.

Here are the individuals I sent the material to besides the representatives in New Hampshire: Rep. Phil Hart [Idaho], Rep. Pete Nielsen {Idaho], Rep. Bryan Hughes [Texas}, Senator David Williams {Kentucky], Senator Howard Stephenson [Utah], Rep. Leo Berman [Texas], Rep. Matthew Shea {Washington State] Rep. Lois Kolkhorst [Texas] and Rep. Jim Landtroop [Texas]. While I did not send him the materials, if you live in Arizona (think the slimy, corrupt John McCain), I would contact Sen. Ron Gould. He knows all about this fraud. All are fine individuals. If we don't try, we will surely continue down the abyss.

This is NOT a political party issue. It's about fraud and the real intent of the framers of the U.S. Constitution. It's about the right of the states in this Union to have representation in the U.S. Congress.

Now, how bad to we want to get rid of rotten, corrupt senators and how bad do the states want to reclaim their rightful place in Congress?

Enough to make your voice heard at your state house – now? Many state legislatures are only in session a few months and then close up shop. We can't continue to put out a thousand brush fires coming out of the Senate. Once a bill is introduced in a state, then it's up to the people of that state to literally storm the state house demanding passage; non violently of course. Remind them November is coming.

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.

Devvy's regularly posted new columns are on her site at: www.devvy.com. You can also sign up for her free email alerts.

Israeli dual citizen Carl Levin has suspended the civil rights of Americans, another step to establishing a Zionist (Illuminati) police state
in the once "land of the free."

"A cardinal technique of the fifth column is the infiltration of sympathizers into the entire fabric of the nation under attack and, particularly, into positions of policy decision and national defense." Encyclopedia Britannica

by Richard Evans
(henrymakow.com)

What if US Senators and heads of national security agencies were found to have sworn oaths of loyalty to Iran or China?

The bill Obama signed into law on December 31st called the Indefinite Detention Bill, now called the National Defense Act of 2012, which suspends habeas corpus protection of US civilian citizens in their own country at the behest of that bastard child of false flag 911 – Homeland Security – was authored and presented by Michigan Senator Carl Levin. Senator Levin holds dual citizenship as an Israeli.

"What's wrong with that? Israel is our Ally", most Americans would say. I used to believe that. But the history of US/Israeli relations relative to Israeli relations with other nations tells another story.

Israeli foreign policy has a history of covert operations directly counter to the national interests and domestic welfare of the United States dating back to 1961.

This is conflict of interest. Conflict of interest occurs when an individual or organization in a position of public trust is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in the other. Questioning dual citizenship of elected officials is in no way antisemitism. The issue is conflict of interest pure and simple.

This has nothing to with being 'anti-Israel' any more than questioning dual Chinese-American citizenship senators would be. The same would apply if the senator that introduced this bill had Iranian, Chinese, or Russian dual citizenship. I don't believe dual citizenship with any other nation should be allowed for US legislators, Federal bureaucrats, Federal Judges, US military personnel, or any position of influence of national security.

There's nothing wrong with a doctor, a banker, or teacher having dual citizenship. They aren't in positions of public trust. It's entirely inappropriate for a public servant.

Sen. Levin is chairman of the Armed Services Committee. That means he is empowered with legislative oversight of the nation's military, including the Department of Defense, military research and development, nuclear energy (as pertaining to national security), benefits for members of the military, the Selective Service System and other matters related to defense policy. In addition he is ex-officio on the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Select Committee on Intelligence. This man has control of the most powerful military in the world.

With due respect for Levin – how can be be objective about the application of US military policy in the Middle East as a resident of Israel?

In secret back channel communications in 1961, Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion asked President Kennedy to support Israeli offensive weapons development and supply American Hawk missiles for starters. Kennedy not only refused, he said he planned to honor the 1950 Tripartite Declaration which said that the United States would retaliate against any nation in the Middle East that attacked any other country. Finally, Kennedy informed Ben Gurion the US wouldn't support Israel's development of nuclear weapons.

Ben Gurion was furious. Unknown to the American public at the time, the two leaders engaged in a hot exchange of communiques. Threats were made. The conflict wasn't made public till 1998 in an article by Ethan Bronner in the New York Times. Much of the content of Ben Gurion's letters to Kennedy remain classified by the US Government. Subsequently Ben Gurion initiated secret collaboration with Maoist China for mutual nuclear weapons development.

(The history of Mossad and the Chinese secret service collaboration on many occasions in outright theft of American military secrets is documented in Gordon Thomas' Seeds of Fire).

While this was going on, in Jan 1962, LOOK magazine published an interview in which Ben Gurion predicted the future. By 1987, he said,

"In Jerusalem, the United Nations will build a shrine of the prophets to serve the federated union of all continents; this will be the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah." [1]

When the CIA informed Kennedy in 1963 that the MOSSAD and the Chinese were partners in espionage for US weapons secrets he threatened to cut off US relations with Israel unless the nuclear development base at Dimona were opened to US inspectors. Rather than submit to this ultimatum, Ben Gurion resigned as prime minister in July 1963. [2]

Kennedy was assassinated November 22rd 1963. In The Final Judgment, Michael Collins Piper traces an Israeli (Mossad) connection to the Kennedy assassination.

Under Kennedy's successor Lyndon Johnson, believed to be a crypto Jew, US aid to Israel increased three fold, equipping Israel with state of the art tanks and fighter jets that won the Six Day War in 1967.

Abraham Feinberg, the 'Democrat fundraiser' who had been Ben Gurion's bagman to Harry Truman, heavily financed Johnson's political career. The total is unknown since most contributions were cash. But it can be approximated by Israeli 'sweetheart' deals slipped to Feldman, such as a multimillion dollar share of the Israeli Coca Cola franchise.

On the cue of 911, the already prepared PATRIOT Act was was introduced by Republican Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) with Democratic Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Feinstein and Schumer were both Israeli dual citizens.

But they don't want Americans to follow their example when demanding their own freedom and independence.

No worry. Americans have been fighting Zionist wars for so long, they don't know how to fight their own.

Finally, Zionism is just an instrument of the Illuminati, (i.e. the Cabalist central bankers.) The ultimate Illuminati plan may be for "Zionists" (US, EU, Israel) to battle "anti-Zionists" (Iran, Russia and China) in a third world war.

It's possible that we are being led down the garden path
and we are accomplices in our own destruction.

Arnold Toynbee (A Study of History) clarified the European paradoxes of history that when political, moral and intellectual values come close to stagnation, “warriors become dreamers” to overrun the world. European colonization of the racially inferior herds was a planned scheme of things, not an accidental history – an obsessive political belief that Europeans were superior in their intellect, ethnicity, race, color and human configuration than the other people of the globe.

Britain embarked on invading and conquering the fertile heartlands of Asia and Africa to occupy their natural resources and use human beings as slave trade – a business ran efficiently across the seas unto the making of new America. Italian, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese and other followed the suit. Strangely enough, none seemed to have challenged the other Europeans in their domain of business enterprise, military control and imperialist quest for political supremacy. Many Europeans interpret it – a history making events for the emerging liberal democracy, industrialization and cheap labor sweat of Asian and African origins. Lord Macaulay, a British Viceroy of India spelled out the futuristic education policy in clear terms: “Indian in color but British in taste, thinking and behavior” – the new neo-colonial generations of future Indians seen from the British eyes and mindset. After centuries of warfare and killings of million and millions of fellow human beings, they claim to be civilized nation – the nuisance baggage you will hear often referred to at global academic conferences and at the redundant UNO Security apparatus. Were all the European imperial forces acts as terrorism or peacemaking across the globe? Racially conscientious Europeans forced by the nature and compulsion of the self-image went on to global conquests by radiating aggressive and violent acts as a deliberate policy – a political engine to encroach the Asian and African continents for centuries.

H.G. Wells (Outline of History, Bk 5) said it right: “So began the first of the most wasteful and disastrous series of wars that has ever darkened the history of mankind.”

Terrorism originates from the Western colonial powers but none would dare to concede it for the FEAR of unknown intellectual, moral and political consequences in contemporary history. When the European businessmen explored new world markets for diminishing resources and their armed forces invaded and occupied the vast Islamic world, there were no television, internet, video cameras and stone throwing public and voices of reason to call them foreign mercenaries, aggressors and terrorists. The colonization scheme of things was not outcome of the Western democratic values to spread freedom, liberty and justice but ferocity of violence and killings of millions and millions of human lives for the Empires to be built on colored bloodbaths. The European crusaders crossed the channels and unknown time zones to subjugate the much divided Muslim people as part of their superior nationalism perception and values that Muslims were inferior to the European race and could be used as subjects without human identity and as raw material to build the new Empires. Many centuries past, if there was a UNO, it would not have dared to call the European intruders as terrorists because it would have been their own organization as Muslims lived in slavery and denial of basic human rights and identity. In an information age, knowledge–driven global culture of reason, ignorance is no longer a requisite to learn from the living history.

India under the Mughal Empire prior to British imperialist designs and subjugation had enjoyed an enriched culture, educational institutions, monetary currencies, social and economic development, and a viable system of governance suitable to the interest of the people. With British onslaught, business deceits and occupation of India, these public institutions were dismantled and their foundations destroyed and replaced by force with British system of educational indoctrination, thinking modes and behaviors, laws and justice, morals, organizations and imported culture. The Indians were compelled to assume new identities and to learn English and assimilate into European style culturally manifested landscape of India. Was this imperialism a choice in democracy and civilization?

Throughout human history the destitute and poor people of Asia and Africa never had the thinking or capacity to threaten the European by any means. Until European incursions into their lands, they had peaceful societal outlook, educational institutions, industrial development, human freedom, public institutions and viable system of governance. Take India for instance, it had a history of almost thousand years of rule by Mughal Empire and major advancements in economic and intellectual progressive domains. British went there as businessmen and through intrigues, tactful deceptions and backdoor conspiracies worked hard to divide and disintegrate the unity of the local people. They divided them by force of treachery and ruled over them. In 1857 at the last war in Delhi, it is said almost two millions Indian mostly Muslims were killed by the British armies to link India as a jewel to the British crown. The last Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar was exiled to Burma and his son’s head chopped off and presented to him on a breakfast plate. British historians call it a mutiny, the succeeding generations of Muslims narrate it as an episode of freedom movement crushed by the British colonial invaders. Perhaps, the British Queen should take initiatives to address these inhuman atrocities against the Asian and African people and forced colonization, more so when she is set to celebrate her golden jubilee soon. Would the British Crown apologize from the Muslims for its killing and aggressive war and occupation of India under the Mughal Empire?

Now, the Europeans identify themselves as civilized people but the effective date for this claim remains a mystery. The previous Empires knew their geography and limits, but the newly articulated American Empire in its infancy, is challenging to the limits of the Laws of God and appears obsessed with “fear” of being replaced by the new emerging economically productive nations of Asia such as China, Japan and India and combination of others. In a reactionary and irrational impulse, President George W. Bush invoked the “War on Terrorism” against Muslims as a dictum of power, not reason and wisdom, to camouflage the prospective future with acts of barbarity and to dispel the notion of accountability in global affairs. Historically, people and nations pursuing this path of behavior have ended up in self-delusion and self-destruction.

The 9/11 attacks in the US were carried out by individuals and not inspired or supported by the religion of Islam or Muslims. Some hourly paid intellectuals turned guardian of the approved truth, allege that Islam breeds terrorism. The Western mass media complements the self crafted notion to poison the public thinking and perceptions and source of judgments against the Arabs and Muslims as “terrorists” making the treacherous claim as if Islam was at the threshold of the paradigm. The US Neo-Conservatives gang helped to rob mankind of its human heritage. The perception of ‘radical Islam’ was invented and enhanced by the ‘fear’ of terrorism as if Arabs and Muslims were born in the eye of the storm and terrorism was an exclusive domain of the Islamic religious tenets.

Gwynne Dyer, the London based prominent writer (The International Terrorist Conspiracy”) points out that “Terrorism is a political technique, not an ideology and any group willing to use violence in pursuit of its political goals may resort to it.” He explains that “there are left-wing terrorists and right-wing terrorists; national terrorist and international terrorist; Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and atheist terrorists. In theory, you could have a “war against terrorism”, but it would involve trying to kill everybody who uses this technique anywhere in the world. The United States is not trying to do that, so it is not fighting a “war against terror.” In reality, what the United States leadership is doing is fighting its own articulated war against the people and nations who had no animosity, nor did any perceive capability to threaten the US as a global power.

British author and producer Adam Curtis (The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear: BBC documentary challenging the American version of the “War on Terrorism”), spells out the myth with clarity: “international terrorism is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services and the international media.” Remember, after the 9/11 attacks, the US official statements made no mention of involvement of the government or people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran in the accused list of the 9/11 perpetrators. In 1997, many leading architects of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), did include the name of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, PLO as selected targets to impose the American liberal democracy and throw out the authoritarian regimes. It was a strategic stunt to inject the fear into people’s mind. Paul Craig Roberts, in his recent article (“The High Price of American Gullibility”, ICH), makes a logical assertion: Bush’s rhetoric “you are with us or against us” is perfectly planned to influence the common masses. Emotional appeals to fear and to patriotism have led close to half of the population to accept unaccountable government in the name of “the war on terrorism.” What a contradiction it is that so many American have been convinced that safety lies in their sacrifice of their civil liberties and unaccountable government.” Obviously, human intelligence, emotions and perceptions, superficially turned antagonistic with compelling impulse of media propaganda strategies to view Arabs and Muslims as the qualified candidates for extreme militancy.

Truth is one and indivisible. When it comes to terrorism and the Arabs or Muslims, the North American and European mass media portrayals enforce two distinct order of truth – one for the general public and one reserved for the Muslims. In all human affairs, facts are considered to reach the conclusion. End cannot be assumed to play with the facts, nor based on dogmas to explain the facts of human life. Under the guise of the Anti-Terrorist legislation, America, Britain and Canada have misused the logic of power to arrest, defame and punish people of Arabian and Islamic origin who had no linkage to the terrorism myth. The strategy dictates that selected groups should be detained and tortured indefinitely, to drain out their moral, intellectual and creative energies, making them incapable to survive as socially or professionally credible citizens of the country. Consequently, the public will view them as crazy and undesirable people to be counted as numbers and digits in economic terms, but not dignified human beings.

Divergent scenarios flourish to manifest lies and deception about the real aims of the “War on Terror.” When the Western leaders play with words, it is known and often acknowledged, but when the Muslim leaders offer ignorant excuses, they are masked under willful lies and deceptions without any accountability. Many Western scholars wonder, why leaders of the Arab countries and the masses appear disinterested in the post 9/11 affairs when it had direct impacts on the entire Arab and Muslim world. Foremost reasons being that the Arabs and the Muslim countries in general, do not have educated and responsible leaders to represent the masses and their interests. The West and its scheme of political subjugation institutionalized the neo-colonial authoritarianism. Arabs and Muslim societies are devoid of public institutions for thinking, change and policy development. In the made–run politics of wars, Arabs-Muslims have no weight on the scale except being digits and numbers.

The Muslim world is politically weak, intellectually and morally divided and leaderless. The Arab League is just a written name on paper in dry ink and nothing else. The recent events and authoritarian warmongering across the Arabian Peninsula clearly demonstrates that Arab dictators are disconnected rulers with the mainstream of their societies and people’s movement for change and freedom from the tyranny of neo-colonialism. Most of them are puppets installed by the former Western imperial masters to ensure the oil pumping and safe delivery of the oil supply lines to Western markets. When the Muslim Ummah (nation), looks for intellectual security, it fails to get any logical support – all authoritarian leaders operate under the dictates of Western masters, namely the American and British leaders. Islam is One and so should be the believing folks, but there is no unity of thought and actions across the Muslim world, a typically neo-colonial landscape governed by ignorant and intellectually bankrupt rulers, subservient to the West. For ages, the Arabs and Muslims masses continue to pray to Almighty God for change, reformation and democratically elected governments without public demonstrations.

Europeans invaded the rich and morally and spiritually advanced people of the Arab-Islamic world several times in unsuccessful attempts to take control and establish political and religious hegemony over them. The true history of the European Crusades has never ended to any decisive conclusion. In 2001, President Bush made it known that it was a “crusade” against the Islamic world after the 9/11 tragedies in the US. It is undetermined what other titles and names would the imperialist European assign to their continuous crusades against the Muslims in Asia, Middle East, North Africa and other vital strategic locations. Many pretend that it was a “democracy at work.” Rational observers would call it democracy at home and barbarity abroad. The distinction is self-explanatory.

Would the American and British political leaders learn any lessons for their failure in the on-going wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? While the rest of the so called Islamic world was complacent and coward, an International War Tribunal in Malaysia concluded the public proceedings and unanimously charged Tony Blair and George W. Bush as guilty of crimes against the humanity in Iraq. Would the masses in Europe and America pursue the guilty verdicts and asked the officials concerned to arrest these sadistic criminals? John Laughland (“The Mask of Altruism Disguising a Colonial War: The Guardian: Aug 2, 2004), offers a real world perspective: “Just an old fashioned colonial war – the reality of killing and escalation of violence, disguised with the hypocritical mask of altruism. If Iraq has not taught us that, then we are incapable of ever learning anything.” Every beginning has its end. It is just that most transgressors do not know about it when they cross over the limits of the Laws of God. The Roman, Austro-Hungarian and British Empires collapsed after they violated the limits. Nazis claimed to run the world for thousands of years, but ended up in just 12 years after killing millions of human beings throughout the Western hemisphere. Fascism met resistance at its early stages. The beginning envisions the end. The USSR was defeated, the day it raided the destitute people of Afghanistan and disturbed the dead in graveyards with continuous bombing. The American and British surrendered the day the international community learned about the Guantanamo Bay prisoners and photos of the Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq. An estimated three million civilians have been killed by the American-British war in Iraq since March 2003.

After waging a decade old bogus wars of terrorism in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, America and some of its hired European allied policy makers and military strategists seem to have exhausted their rational THINKING and failed miserably to understand or differentiate between the myth of power and realities on the ground that they cannot win any wars against Islam and Muslims. Of all the forbidden truth that the Western news media does not exhibit and the political leaders failed to grasp is that the US and its former colonial allies do not have the will nor weapons to fight against God and Islam. If time and history could reawaken their conscience and give them a space for self-reflection, would they ever learn this compelling reality from the undeniable recorded history of the Nature of things?

President Obama dashed away all the optimism for A New America – different than the perpetuated insanity of the Bush era, more akin to peace and co-existence with the rest of the global community in particular, the Arab-Muslim world. It was a political myth that Obama used to get elected, not to govern and work out a new way of thinking for the future of the US policy behavior and relationships. All the impartial observations clearly point out that Obama has been a blind follower of the Bush administration political inconsistency between thoughts and behavior. Who is going to write the closing chapter of the history of the “War on Terrorism?” Is the history going to wait for the cessation of the aggressive hostilities in Iraq and Afghanistan and Pakistan? Would the American-led war achieve its agenda priorities or meet the same destiny as it happened to the Romans, German Nazis and the USSR Empires? Obviously, history will judge the nations and leaders by their actions, not by their claims.

In his farewell address to the American people (01/17/1961), President D. Eisenhower made the following foresight known to the masses:

…. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent, I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and lingering sadness of war – as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years…… We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied, that those who denied the opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full…….. That the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.”

Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in global security, peace and conflict resolution with keen interests in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations and author of several publications including the latest one: Arabia at Crossroads: Arab People Strive for Freedom, Peace and New Leadership. VDM Publishers Germany-UK, September 2011. Comments are welcome at: kmahboob@yahoo.com

Comments Off on Western Imperialism and the Unspoken Tyranny of Colonization

The EU, from the very beginning, has been a project to destroy democracy in Europe, and replace it with a bankster-controlled central regime. What is happening now is what was always intended. The collapse-bailout scenario was designed specifically to bring all EU nations/provinces into debt bondage (aka sovereign debt) to the banksters. Germany has been the most difficult target, but it too will fall, as it is dragged into assuming liability for EU sovereign debt generally. Once that happens, then – whenever the 'markets decide' – the next bubble will burst, including $600 trillion in worthless derivative instruments. Down will go Germany, EU and all.

The Irish State, via the major party apparatus, has surrendered its loyalty and allegiance totally to the EU project. Those folks see themselves as players in the Big Game of Europe, and their duty as 'bringing us culchies along' with the program. Agreeing to bail out the banks was equivalent to signing a treaty, announcing the formal surrender of sovereignty to the financial elites. Our local IMF overseer is not here as part of a temporary repayment program, he's here permanently as our new Imperial Governor, not from London this time, not even from Brussels, but a personal agent of the bankster dynasty.

In Italy, and in Spain, we also see Imperial Governors, appointed not elected, installed as heads of state, and in the case of Italy the fellow comes to us from Goldman Sachs. The pattern is clear, and Ireland seems to be leading the way in the sovereignty-surrendering process. That's why we keep getting pats on the back from the EU. If we don't do something to change things, the future of Ireland is certain. I suppose 'return to plantation days' would be a reasonable characterization. Every asset, including our water, will be owned by foreign investors and corporations.

This process of surrender cannot be stopped by fighting single-issue battles. Our energies are dissipated, defending one barricade after another, none of which are strong enough to stop the onslaught. If we want to have any hope of succeeding, we must focus on the one single issue that is of equal importance to every Irish person: we are losing our nation; we are being re-colonized. There is no future for us unless we can regain our sovereignty and install a government that actually represents the people. The loyalty of the major parties is with the EU, and whoever they put forward represents the party, not the people. The only way we can get a government that represents us, is if we select our representatives by some other process.

Imagine, for example, a People's Convention, where we decide what we want from the next government, and select a slate of folks from the Convention to be our TDs, who are committed to that program, with a focus on the role of their local constituency. In a country with as much social cohesiveness as Ireland, such a Convention is a real possibility. And it would need to be preceded by local and regional conversations, including all voices, so we could develop a bottom-up consensus vision regarding our future.

From an entirely economic perspective, if we think in terms of the self-interest of the Irish people, and given what the EU has become, the best thing that could happen would be for Ireland to withdraw from the EU and the Euro, repudiate the debts as being 'odious', issue its own currency on a debt-free basis, and rebuild a resilient national economy. Argentina, Russia, and others have demonstrated that repudiating debts and starting over, declaring bankruptcy, is the best option under the kind circumstances we are facing.

Rather than defending retreating lines of barricades, I think it would make sense for activists to focus on a positive vision for Ireland's future, based on understanding the economic alternative futures that are possible: one imposed externally, and the other self-determined. Imagine if a national conversation could begin, over our diverse civil society networks, a creative conversation about how we could get things moving on this island, if we were economically liberated to apply our innate creativity and productivity, and to make wise use of our abundant resources.

I think people are ready for a positive conversation. Everywhere there is desperation, cynicism, frustration, resignation, disgust, anger, in various mixtures, and nowhere much positive on offer to think about. Occupy The Future, one might say, makes sense as a movement for Ireland. Sovereignty, I believe, is just below the surface in everyone's consciousness. It's just barely 'outside the box' of realistic thinking. When the idea pops up, it's dismissed with a chuckle. But I think a presentation could be put together, that could introduce economic sovereignty as a viable alternative, and to which people would respond, as the idea is liberated from the unthinkable.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

Here’s something you can take to the bank. By loaning more money than GDP could ever repay, Italy, Spain, and now Ireland have been taken over by the Rothschild’s dynasty (IMF), the governments of the world’s personal banker. Can you imagine all three of these countries being governed by banker appointed governors, with the people having no say so? May I suggest you reconsider the current situation in America, and think about how hard it would be to regain our sovereignty once it is lost. Do you see the progression that is occurring right under your nose? First, you loan governments more money than they could ever repay, then go in and buy up the government owned and private services needed to sustain life (dirt cheap). Then drive the economy into a hole that devastates the population, and create a police state to keep the people frightened, next comes a new power structure with the people left out of it, and no ability to get back in control…..ever! I know this is getting some of you scared, but the obvious, and only choice, we have is to take down the banking cartel and seize their assets. You may think I’m a crazy old man, but you will rue the day you did not climb on this idea with me. Freedom is not free, and it damn sure is worth dying for! Keep an eye on Italy, Spain, and Ireland, and watch their agony increase as the tyranny grows.

The banking Cartel will wring every shekel out of them like someone running cookies through an old fashioned ringer washing machine.

Most firearms enthusiasts would agree that suppressed firearms are some of the most fun and most desirable firearms toys you can play with.

In addition to the cool factor that comes with seeing James Bond, Jason Bourne, special operations units, and other action heroes use them throughout the years, they have a tremendous amount of practical value for firearms enthusiasts in general and preparedness minded people in particular.

Just to dispel any preconceived ideas that you might have, the vast majority of the benefits of suppressed weapons can be enjoyed without having to endure a “Mad Max” scenario.

Before we get into the benefits of suppressed weapons, let me give you some quick background…

(For additional easy to digest information, I encourage you to go through the short course that Advanced Armament offers at AACCanU (AAC Can University). It takes 5-10 minutes to go through and when you finish, they’ll send you a diploma granting you a “Bachelor of Silence” degree.

To begin with, “silencers” don’t silence a weapon…they only suppress the sound level of the firearm, which is why there has been a shift from calling them “silencers” to calling them “suppressors.” When a firearm discharges, particularly a semi-automatic firearm, there are several sources of noise:

1. The bolt/slide assembly going backwards, the spent round being extracted, and the next round being loaded.

2. The muzzle blast.

3. Bullets traveling faster than roughly 1150 feet per second will break the sound barrier and cause a sonic boom.

4. The sound of the mechanical percussion that ignites the round.

5. The sound of the round hitting a target.

For the most part, suppressors suppress the sound of muzzle blasts and don’t affect the other 4 factors, but simply suppressing the muzzle blast can often mean the difference between needing to wear hearing protection to shoot and not needing to wear hearing protection.

Suppressors use the same noise suppression concept as automobile mufflers…in fact they were developed at the same time and “silencer” and “muffler” are used interchangeably with both technologies in many parts of the world. Both allow the expansion of gasses inside of a container rather than in the open air.

And, just like there are several non-tactical benefits to using an automobile muffler, there are several non-tactical benefits to using a suppressor in addition to the tactical ones.

To begin with, it’s just polite. In England, New Zealand, and several other “civilized” countries around the world that allow firearms of one type or another, people use silencers so that they can talk while shooting, hear after shooting, shoot while their friends and family sit and chat nearby, shoot near their pets without damaging their hearing, shoot without bothering the neighbors, and shoot at night without waking the neighbors and/or causing unnecessary calls to law enforcement.

With the benefit that suppressors have when shooting around animals, it would be ironic, but understandable if PETA became a big proponent of the loosening of laws and expanded use of suppressors.

Expanding on that list, there are an increasing number of “suppressor only” firearms competitions where the non-competitors of all ages can comfortably have normal conversations without hearing protection just a few yards behind the line.

Many low-light training courses have had to be canceled in recent years because of neighbors complaining about the noise when they’re trying to relax for the evening or sleep. Suppressors are an obvious solution to this issue.

Also, nighttime is the best time to shoot one of America’s most costly animals…wild hogs. I said “shoot” instead of “hunt” because hogs are estimated to cause $200-$800 in damage apiece per year and sows can deliver as many as 10 babies per year. As a result, hog control becomes a mix between hunting and eradication. What this means is that in addition to bothering the neighbors less when hunting with a suppressed weapon, it also can allow the shooter the opportunity to take more hogs per engagement—this is because they will be able to see better and get back on target quicker and because the decrease in noise MIGHT allow them multiple shots before the herd scatters. And if you’re wondering if you can hunt hogs with a silencer…the answer depends on where you are. 18 states allow either varmint eradication and/or hunting with a silencer. In some states, you can use silencers, night vision, and/or thermal vision. In Texas, you can even shoot hogs while hanging out of a helicopter.

Great learning tool

Next, when you consider the fact that suppressors decrease sound levels, improve accuracy, reduce felt recoil, and reduce muzzle flip, it quickly becomes evident that they are almost the perfect tool to use when introducing a new shooter to the sport…particularly young shooters and females who may be apprehensive of firearms in the first place.

They’ll be able to hear your range commands easier since they don’t have to wear ear protection, they won’t feel like they’re being yelled at since you’ll be able to use your normal voice, they won’t be as afraid of the blast & recoil as they might be, and the reduction of muzzle flip leads to a significant reduction in anticipatory flinch. (This is when you “push” the barrel down in anticipation of the round going off to try to counteract recoil. It is one of the most, if not the most common problem that shooters of all skill levels have.)

In a non-tactical survival situation, hunting with a suppressor also has the benefit of shortening the radius considerably within which other people could DF (direction find) you based on the report of your shot. Put another way, if people could hear your unsuppressed shot a mile away and get a bead on where you’re shooting from, that distance might drop down to as little as a quarter mile with a suppressed weapon. While that’s 1/4th the distance, the true impact comes into focus when you realize that dropping the distance that people can hear you from 1 mile to a quarter mile decreases the area where people can stand and hear your shot by 16 times. (A circle with a 1 mile radius covers 3.14 square miles. A circle with a .25 mile radius covers .2 square miles) As a note, the distance from which a firearm discharge can be heard depends on many, many factors and the 1 mile and ¼ mile distances that I gave are simply for illustrative purposes.

Tactical Considerations

Even though tactical benefits won’t be nearly as useful to most people, there are some notable ones that I want to share with you.

1. If you’re on a tactical team where everyone is using suppressed weapons, it will be very easy to differentiate friend from foe.

2. If you’re not an audio blocker, your hearing will probably be shot pretty quickly after you fire your first shot and you won’t be able to communicate as effectively with your team. Suppressors mean that at least, even though your opponents’ weapons may blow your hearing, yours and your teammates won’t. (As a note on the “audio blocker” comment…some people’s ears mysteriously compensate for explosions and firearms noises in high stress situations. This phenomenon is covered in David Grossman’s book, “On Combat.”)

3. With most normal powder loads, suppressors contain most of the muzzle flash and allow shooters to maintain their night vision longer than with unsuppressed weapons.

5. Suppressed light and noise and the alteration of the frequency of the muzzle blast makes direction finding much more difficult than with non-suppressed weapons.

6. Some SWAT teams keep suppressed .22s on hand for shooting out lights during high risk raids. Since everything that goes up must come down and since they’re responsible for every round that leaves their weapons, this is not incredibly common.

Who can own a silencer?

If you’re a legal U.S. Resident, 21 or older, a non-felon, and live in AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, MD, ME, MI, MS, MO, MT, ND, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, or WY, you can own a silencer…you just have to buy it from a firearms dealer who has a “Class III” license and pay a $200 tax for each suppressor. Right now, the wait is approximately 6 months for the ATF to approve your application.

If you don’t live in one of these states, you can STILL buy sub-caliber inserts. I wrote about them about a year and a half ago…I put an excerpt in the P.S. at the end of this article.

As a note, firearms dealers are required to have a Class III license to sell silencers. Silencers are technically called “Title II” items. Another way of saying it is that a dealer has to have a Class III license to sell Title II items. More on Title II items in a few paragraphs.

In other countries where suppressors are legal, they are generally less expensive and easier to obtain.

Unfortunately, in addition to making it unnecessarily cumbersome for law abiding citizens to legally obtain a silencer, it’s also VERY easy to mess up once you own one.

Technically, if you buy a silencer in your name, you are the only person who can use it, have access to it, or control of it without committing a felony. That means that if you own a safe and keep your suppressors in your safe, nobody, including your spouse, can have the combination.

This can be interpreted to apply to both civilians and law enforcement and is an especially big tripping point for law enforcement who personally own short barreled rifles or suppressors and who think that the law doesn’t apply to them and their families.

Fortunately, there’s a solution and it’s a trust that is called the “NFA Gun Trust.” A properly done NFA Gun Trust will allow you to bypass some of the more onerous aspects of the process to buy a suppressor, as well as give you a tool to legally enjoy them with friends and relatives. If you’re going to have any suppressors or other NFA Title II items (which includes fully automatic weapons, short barreled rifles, suppressors, all other weapons, and destructive devices), you REALLY want to have a properly done NFA Gun Trust.

I said “properly done” twice because there are several attorneys and gun stores who are giving/selling people defective NFA Gun Trusts. In some cases, it has meant that when people who had several Title II items in a defective trust went to buy another Title II item, it lead to the ATF confiscating ALL of their Title II items.

Now, please understand that I don’t agree with the need for an NFA Gun Trust. I would like to see the items simply covered under the Second Ammendment, for the tax stamp requirement to go away, and for the need for the trust to go away. Unfortunately, that’s not reality and reality has convinced me of the need to do everything according to the laws on the books and have an NFA Gun Trust to protect myself, my family, and our firearms.

What I did was go to the granddaddy of NFA Gun Trusts, David Goldman. Title II owners across the country owe Mr. Goldman a huge debt of gratitude for deciding to focus on NFA Gun Trusts and figure out all of the tweaks and changes that needed to be made to make the process of buying, storing, enjoying, and transferring Title II items as legal and painless as possible for law abiding people who just want to stay out of trouble.

David has done THOUSANDS of these trusts. If you want to get one, you simply contact his office atGunTrustLawyer.com, and give them your information. (His site is a treasure chest of good solid information on Title II weapons) They’ll do the majority of the trust in their offices and then forward your trust to an attorney in your state who will do the final customizations to make the trust legal in your state. When I went through the process with him, it was painless and informative and I strongly encourage you to contact him if you have any interest in getting Title II items. He’s offered to discount his fees for my readers, so if you want to save some money, tell him I referred you.

David includes a guide with his trusts that lay out how to buy items, set up banking correctly so you don’t make the trust defective, how to fill out the forms correctly, and what you MUST include and shouldn’t include with your application. I can tell you from personal experience that this is incredibly valuable, as is the ability to call them (sometimes multiple times) while you’re at the counter filling out the forms to buy your Title II items to make sure you’re doing everything correctly. The guide also includes instructions how to legally buy private party, travel with Title II items, move from state to state, and more.

Also, if you currently have a NFA Gun Trust, you may want to have Mr. Goldman review it to make sure that it’s not a defective trust that could expose you to considerable unnecessary liability. Unfortunately, there are a LOT of defective trusts floating around that used estate planning trusts, did a couple of find-and-replaces, and thought it would work as an NFA Gun Trust.

As a note, we all know how much the current administration wants to limit the rights of gun owners. It’s a fair guess that the sale of Title II items would be an easy early target. That’s why I’m buying suppressors whenever I can. They’re kind of pricy, so it’s not something I get every week or even every month, but it’s something that I’m making forward progress on.

That’s it for this week. Let me know if you’ve got any experience with suppressors and whether or not you intend on buying any in the future. If you had a choice, would you rather have a fully automatic weapon, a suppressed weapon, or a short barreled rifle? Share your thoughts by commenting below:

One final note…Thanks for all of the great feedback on Jeff Anderson’s Social Chaos Survival Guide. If you haven’t checked it out yet, I encourage you to do so before his special bonus expires.

Until next week, God bless & stay safe,

David Morris

P.S. Here’s an excerpt on what I wrote on the sub-caliber round:

$15 “Silencer” For Your .308 With NO Tax Stamp!

I got my latest “Sportsman’s Guide” catalog this week and they’ve got a very neat little “tool” that will let you shoot .32 ACP ammo through bolt action .308s (and a few other .30 caliber rifles).

They’re called “sub caliber sleeves” or “rifle chamber inserts.” I’ve got a handfull of these little treasures and they have a few important uses for preppers.

To begin with, when you shoot a .32 ACP through a .308 barrel, the report is MUCH quieter than with a .308…almost like using a silencer. Next, if you’re training someone to shoot a high powered rifle, it’s less expensive to shoot .32 ACP than .308 and there’s almost no recoil. The last major benefit I’ll cover is meat damage. It should be obvious, but if you shoot small game with a .32 ACP, there will be a lot less meat destroyed than if you make the same shot with a .308.

But as AFP reports today, there is another major motivation for the expanding wars:

The latest round of American sanctions are aimed at shutting down Iran’s central bank, a senior US official said Thursday, spelling out that intention directly for the first time.

“We do need to close down the Central Bank of Iran (CBI),” the official told reporters on condition of anonymity, while adding that the United States is moving quickly to implement the sanctions, signed into law last month.

Foreign central banks that deal with the Iranian central bank on oil transactions could also face similar restrictions under the new law, which has sparked fears of damage to US ties with nations like Russia and China.

“If a correspondent bank of a US bank wants to do business with us and they’re doing business with CBI or other designated Iranian banks… then they’re going to get in trouble with us,” the US official said.

What happened to Mr. Gaddafi, many speculate the real reason he was ousted was that he was planning an all-African currency for conducting trade. The same thing happened to him that happened to Saddam because the US doesn’t want any solid competing currency out there vs the dollar. You know Gaddafi was talking about a gold dinar.

Ellen Brown argues in the Asia Times that there were even deeper reasons for the war than gold, oil or middle eastern regime change.

Brown argues that Libya – like Iraq under Hussein – challenged the supremacy of the dollar and the Western banks:

Later, the same general said they planned to take out seven countries in five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

What do these seven countries have in common? In the context of banking, one that sticks out is that none of them is listed among the 56 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). That evidently puts them outside the long regulatory arm of the central bankers’ central bank in Switzerland.

The most renegade of the lot could be Libya and Iraq, the two that have actually been attacked. Kenneth Schortgen Jr, writing on Examiner.com, noted that “[s]ix months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept euros instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar.”

According to a Russian article titled “Bombing of Libya – Punishment for Ghaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar”, Gaddafi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar. Gaddafi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency.

And that brings us back to the puzzle of the Libyan central bank. In an article posted on the Market Oracle, Eric Encina observed:

One seldom mentioned fact by western politicians and media pundits: the Central Bank of Libya is 100% State Owned … Currently, the Libyan government creates its own money, the Libyan Dinar, through the facilities of its own central bank. Few can argue that Libya is a sovereign nation with its own great resources, able to sustain its own economic destiny. One major problem for globalist banking cartels is that in order to do business with Libya, they must go through the Libyan Central Bank and its national currency, a place where they have absolutely zero dominion or power-broking ability. Hence, taking down the Central Bank of Libya (CBL) may not appear in the speeches of Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy but this is certainly at the top of the globalist agenda for absorbing Libya into its hive of compliant nations.

According to more than a few observers, Gadhafi’s plan to quit selling Libyan oil in U.S. dollars ­ demanding payment instead in gold-backed “dinars” (a single African currency made from gold) ­ was the real cause [of the Libyan war and killing of Gadhafi]. The regime, sitting on massive amounts of gold, estimated at close to 150 tons, was also pushing other African and Middle Eastern governments to follow suit.

And it literally had the potential to bring down the dollar and the world monetary system by extension, according to analysts. French President Nicolas Sarkozy reportedly went so far as to call Libya a “threat” to the financial security of the world. The “Insiders” were apparently panicking over Gadhafi’s plan.

“Any move such as that would certainly not be welcomed by the power elite today, who are responsible for controlling the world’s central banks,” noted financial analyst Anthony Wile, editor of the free market-oriented Daily Bell, in an interview with RT. “So yes, that would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal and the need for other reasons to be brought forward [for] removing him from power.”

According to Wile, Gadhafi’s plan would have strengthened the whole continent of Africa in the eyes of economists backing sound money ­ not to mention investors. But it would have been especially devastating for the U.S. economy, the American dollar, and particularly the elite in charge of the system.

“The central banking Ponzi scheme requires an ever-increasing base of demand and the immediate silencing of those who would threaten its existence,” Wile noted in a piece entitled “ GaddafiPlanned Gold Dinar, Now Under Attack” earlier this year. “Perhaps that is what the hurry [was] in removing Gaddafi in particular and those who might have been sympathetic to his monetary idea.”

Investor newsletters and commentaries have been buzzing for months with speculation about the link between Gadhafi’s gold dinar and the NATO-backed overthrow of the Libyan regime. Conservative analysts pounced on the potential relationship, too.

“In 2009 ­ in his capacity as head of the African Union ­ Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi had proposed that the economically crippled continent adopt the ‘Gold Dinar,’” noted Ilana Mercer in an August opinion piece for WorldNetDaily. “I do not know if Col. Gadhafi continued to agitate for ditching the dollar and adopting the Gold Dinar ­ or if the Agitator from Chicago got wind of Gadhafi’s (uncharacteristic) sanity about things monetary.”

But if Arab and African nations had begun adopting a gold-backed currency, it would have had major repercussions for debt-laden Western governments that would be far more significant than the purported “democratic” uprisings sweeping the region this year. And it would have spelled big trouble for the elite who benefit from “ freshly counterfeited funny-money,” Mercer pointed out.

“Had Gadhafi sparked a gold-driven monetary revolution, he would have done well for his own people, and for the world at large,” she concluded. “A Gadhafi-driven gold revolution would have, however, imperiled the positions of central bankers and their political and media power-brokers.”

Adding credence to the theory about why Gadhafi had to be overthrown, as The New American reported in March, was the rebels’ odd decision to create a central bank to replace Gadhafi’s state-owned monetary authority. The decision was broadcast to the world in the early weeks of the conflict.

In a statement describing a March 19 meeting, the rebel council announced, among other things, the creation of a new oil company. And more importantly: “Designation of the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and appointment of a Governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.”

The creation of a new central bank, even more so than the new national oil regime, left analysts scratching their heads. “I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising,” noted Robert Wenzel in an analysis for the Economic Policy Journal. “This suggests we have a bit more than a rag tag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences,” he added. Wenzel also noted that the uprising looked like a “major oil and money play, with the true disaffected rebels being used as puppets and cover” while the transfer of control over money and oil supplies takes place.

Other analysts, even in the mainstream press, were equally shocked. “Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power?” wondered CNBC senior editor John Carney. “It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.”

Similar scenarios involving the global monetary system ­ based on the U.S. dollar as a global reserve currency, backed by the fact that oil is traded in American money ­ have also been associated with other targets of the U.S. government. Some analysts even say a pattern is developing.

Iran, for example, is one of the few nations left in the world with a state-owned central bank. And Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein, once armed by the U.S. government to make war on Iran, was threatening to start selling oil in currencies other than the dollar just prior to the Bush administration’s “regime change” mission. While most of the establishment press in America has been silent on the issue of Gadhafi’s gold dinar scheme, in Russia, China, and the global alternative media, the theory has exploded in popularity.

A reader comments:

No one is paying attention to the petro-dollars and the current desperation of European and US banks. Even Iran prices oil in $$$s per the treaty after WWII, but no one wants $$$s any more because it has been such a poor investment vehicle. Gold has been much better. Iraq did not want $$$s, was invaded. Libya did not want $$$s, was invaded (I believe they wanted gold). Iran does not want $$$. The dollars are deposited in US and European banks. The dollars standing as the finacial reserve currency of the world was / is being threatened, and thus the Federal Reserve Banks ability to print unlimited dollars!

Comments Off on Are The Middle East Wars Really About Forcing the World Into Dollars and Private Central Banking?

Beware of bubbles of false hope. Right now there is a lot of talk about how the U.S. economy is improving, but it is all a lie. The mainstream media can be very seductive. When you sit down to watch television your brain tends to go into a very relaxed mode.

In such a state, it becomes easy to slip thoughts and ideas past your defenses. Sometimes when I am watching television I realize what the media is trying to do and yet I can still feel it happening to me. In this day and age, it is absolutely critical that we all think for ourselves. When you look at the long-term trends and the long-term numbers, a much different picture of the U.S economy emerges than the one that is painted for us on television. Over the long-term, the number of good jobs in America has been steadily going down. Over the long-term, the number of Americans living in poverty and living on food stamps has been steadily going up. Over the past couple of decades, tens of thousands of businesses, millions of jobs and trillions of dollars of our national wealth have gone out of the country. Our debt is nearly 15 times larger than it was 30 years ago, and U.S. consumer debt has soared by 1700% over the past 40 years. Year after year the rate of inflation goes up faster than our incomes do, and this is absolutely devastating the middle class. Anyone who believes that we can keep doing the same things that we have been doing and yet America will still have a bright economic future is delusional. Until the long-term trends which are taking the U.S. economy straight into the toilet are reversed, any talk of a bright economic future is absolute nonsense.

In America today, we have such a short-term focus. We are all so caught up with what is happening right now. Our attention spans seem to get shorter every single year. At this point it would not be hard to argue that kittens have longer attention spans than most of us do. (If you have ever owned a kitten you know how short their attention spans can be.) Things have gotten so bad that most of our high school students cannot even answer the most basic questions about our history. If people are not talking about it on Facebook or Twitter it is almost as if it does not even matter.

But any serious student of history knows that is is absolutely crucial to examine long-term trends. And when you look at the long-term trends, it rapidly becomes apparent that the U.S. economy is in the midst of a nightmarish long-term decline.

The following are 24 statistics to show to anyone who believes that America has a bright economic future….

#1 Inflation is a silent tax that steals wealth from all of us. We continue to shell out increasing amounts of money for the basic things that we need, and yet our incomes are not keeping pace. Just check out the following example. Gasoline prices have been trending higher for several years in a row as one blogger recently noted….

January 2009 $1.65

January 2010 $2.57

January 2011 $3.04

January 2012 $3.29

#2 If you can believe it, the average American household spent approximately$4,155 on gasoline during 2011.

#3Electricity bills in the United States have risen faster than the overall rate of inflation for five years in a row.

#4 Health care costs continue to rise at a very alarming pace. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, health care costs accounted for just 9.5% of all personal consumption back in 1980. Today they account for approximately16.3%.

#5 Getting a college education has also become insanely expensive in America. After adjusting for inflation, U.S. college students are borrowing about twice as much money as they did a decade ago.

#6 To get the same purchasing power that you got out of $20.00 back in 1970 you would have to have more than $116 today.

#7 To get the same purchasing power that you got out of $20.00 back in 1913 you would have to have more than $457 today.

#8 There are fewer payroll jobs in the United States today than there were back in 2000 even though we have added more than 30 million extra people to the population since then.

#9 The U.S. economy is bleeding millions of good jobs. Greedy CEOs are systematically shipping them overseas and our politicians are standing around and doing nothing about it. This has gone on year after year after year. The following is from a recent article by Paul Craig Roberts….

In the first decade of the 21st century, Americans lost 5,500,000 manufacturing jobs. US employment in the manufacture of computer and electronic products fell by 40%; in the production of machinery by 30%, in motor vehicles and and parts by 44%, and in the manufacture of clothing by 66%.

#10 Our economic infrastructure is being torn apart right in front of our eyes. In 2010, an average of 23 manufacturing facilities a day shut down in the United States. Overall, more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities in the United States have shut down since 2001.

We have made it legal for big corporations to send millions of jobs to countries where it is legal to pay slave labor wages, where the tax burden is much lighter and where there are barely any regulations. The following is a brief excerpt from a recent article posted on Economy in Crisis….

Back in the ‘80s, I called my friend Walter in California and asked: “On your next expansion we need a plant in South Carolina.” Walter replied: “We don’t produce anything in the United States. It’s all in China. China furnishes you the plant on a year-to-year basis. If your investment works out, you don’t have to pay any corporate tax; just reinvest it for another plant and more profit. If it doesn’t work out, you can walk away with no legacy costs. I send a quality controller to watch production. I check on it every day. I don’t have any labor, health, safety, or environmental concerns, and have time to play a round of golf.” The bleeding of jobs off-shore started in the ‘80s — now hemorrhages under Bush and Obama. Waiting for the economy to bounce back; calling this “the worst recession” is a bum rap. The reason the economy hasn’t bounced back since 2008 is because the economy is being off-shored.

#11 As a result of our insane economic policies, our trade balances are absolutely exploding. For example, the U.S. trade deficit with China in 2010was 27 times larger than it was back in 1990.

#12 As you read this, there are millions of Americans out there wondering why they can’t find any jobs. According to Reuters, 23.7 million American workers are either unemployed or underemployed right now.

#13 The number of good jobs has been steadily shrinking in America. Since the year 2000, the United States has lost 10% of its middle class jobs. In the year 2000 there were about 72 million middle class jobs in the United States but today there are only about 65 million middle class jobs.

#14 Over the last three decades, the percentage of low income jobs has consistently risen. Back in 1980, less than 30% of all jobs in the United States were low income jobs. Today, more than 40% of all jobs in the United States are low income jobs.

#15 The number of middle class neighborhoods also continues to decline. In 1970, 65 percent of all Americans lived in “middle class neighborhoods”. By 2007, only 44 percent of all Americans lived in “middle class neighborhoods”.

#16 A decade ago, the United States was ranked number one in average wealth per adult. By 2010, the United States had fallen to seventh.

#17 Our incomes continue to go down. Since December 2007, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% once you account for inflation.

#18 Unfortunately, middle class Americans have been seeing their incomes decline for a very long time. According to one study, between 1969 and 2009 the median wages earned by American men between the ages of 30 and 50 dropped by 27 percent after you account for inflation.

#19 Since 1971, consumer debt in the United States has increased by a whopping 1700%. Unfortunately, U.S. consumers have still not learned how to stay out of debt. According to a recent article posted on Financial Armageddon, the rate of personal savings in the United States is rapidly falling right now at the same time that the total amount of consumer credit is absolutely skyrocketing.

#24 Barack Obama’s proposed 2012 budget projects that the national debt will rise to 26 trillion dollars a decade from now. And his budget numbers are ridiculously optimistic.

Are you starting to get the picture?

All of the long-term economic numbers are progressively getting worse.

As the economy continues to crumble, large numbers of Americans are becoming really desperate. For example, a recent Mother Jones article detailed how large numbers of formerly middle class Americans are now actually growing marijuana in an effort to make ends meet.

As things continue to get worse, people will become even more desperate. There are millions of people out there that find themselves unable to pay the mortgage and put food on the table for their families. When people hit rock bottom, they often find themselves doing things that they never dreamed that they would do.

Meanwhile, the big Wall Street banks just keep getting larger and more powerful. We have allowed the “too big to fail” banks to become much bigger than they have ever been before. The total assets of the six largest U.S. banks increased by 39 percent between September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2011.

Wealth is becoming increasingly concentrated at the very top even as the overall economic pie in America continues to get smaller.

As our economic problems become worse, more Americans than ever are trying to find ways to “escape”.

Other Americans “tune out” by watching endless hours of television, by playing endless hours of video games or by indulging in endless hours of other forms of entertainment.

There are even some Americans that are giving up completely. For example, one elderly man actually robbed a bank just so that he could get arrested and be taken to prison where he would get free health care.

But as I have written about previously, now is not the time to give up. Instead, now is the time to prepare for the great challenges that are ahead.

Almost every generation in history has been faced with great challenges and great hardships at some point.

Yes, there will be some incredibly hard times ahead, but that also means that there will be a need for some great heroes.

Just because the U.S. economy is falling apart does not mean that life is over.

We are living during one of the most exciting times in all of human history. Instead of cowering in fear, let us embrace these times and focus on becoming the people that we were created to be.

As if the United States did not have a bloated enough prison population – which I think nearly every single American realizes is a painful truth – our school systems are being transformed into yet another way to funnel people into the private prison system.

School systems around the country, but especially Texas, have begun criminalizing what would otherwise be normal childish behavior.

One example given by the British Guardian in a recent fantastic article covering this issue, an overweight and unpopular girl was charged with a criminal misdemeanor after spraying perfume because children in the classroom were teasing her and saying she smelled bad.

Unfortunately, this example of the young Sarah Bustamantes is far from isolated. Kids can be arrested for anything ranging from possession of cigarettes, so-called inappropriate clothing, and even something as inconsequential as being late to class.

While the Guardian’s article is surprisingly comprehensive, they do seem to be under the impression that this trend is just a natural consequence of misinformed decisions.

I, on the other hand, find that this trend is part of the large-scale growth of the private prison industry which seeks to create an endless supply of customers who they can charge the state for while leveraging said prisoners for slave labor.

Criminalizing the youth is being done at an earlier and earlier age in order to create these consumers as early as possible and lock them in to an inescapable system.

One criminal charge can mean the difference between getting a student loan, a job, or a spot in a competitive academic program.

With the job market as dismal as it is nowadays, a young person with a criminal record is likely going to be passed over for the many other applicants who do not have such a record.

This leads to a vicious cycle: get charged with a crime, can’t get a job, have to
resort to crime to survive, get charged with another crime, still can’t get a job, have to resort to crime, etc. ad infinitum.

This cycle can lock someone into the world of crime for their entire life and when this starts at an early age, it is even more likely to be the case.

The Justice Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit organization which aims to change the public discussion around justice reform while forwarding “policies that promote well-being and justice for all people and communities,” put out a landmark report in June 2011 which dissects the private prison complex.

In the introduction they write, “While private prison companies may try to present themselves as just meeting existing ‘demand’ for prison beds and responding to current ‘market’ conditions, in fact they have worked hard over the past decade to create markets for their product.”

“As revenues of private prison companies have grown over the past decade, the companies have had more resources with which to build political power, and they have used this power to promote policies that lead to higher rates of incarceration,” they add.

The policies we see in Texas perfectly play in to this by creating a demand from an early age and effectively relegating what should really be behavior to be disciplined by teachers and parents to criminal behavior to be disciplined by the so-called justice system.

The most glaring issue here is that police are actually arresting and charging children for the most ludicrous of crimes (if you can even call them that); all while the law enforcement officers themselves are allowed to get away with murder.

The problem is not just these policies are creating lifetime criminals and clogging up our already bloated prison system, it is that these police officers far too often cross the line in disastrous ways.

One glaring example that springs to mind is the disturbing case of 14-year-old Derek Lopez, who was murdered by a police officer after doing nothing more than punching a fellow student a single time.

“It wasn’t a fight. It was nothing,” the student who was attacked by Lopez later said in a sworn deposition, yet it still got Lopez executed.

Or in 2007 in Chicago when one sixth grader described the following horrific treatment: “The security person grabbed me by me head [sic] and swung me into the door and started hitting me in the stomach. When I fell on the ground, my arm got caught between the door and he kept slamming the door on my arm to stop other students from getting out.”

These are just microcosmic examples of a macrocosmic and wholly destructive trend that is sweeping the United States.

The situation in Texas is a great example of how this is being done at a policy level in order to create lifelong customers for the private prison industry, but many other states have the same thing going on – albeit not as blatantly.

In a 2010 report released by the Community Rights Campaign and the Los Angeles Chapter of Dignity in Schools entitled “ Police in LAUSD Schools: The Need for Accountability and Alternatives” it is revealed that reports of police misconduct gathered from over 1,500 student surveys across 18 Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) schools include: “excessive force and restraint, verbal abuse, sexual harassment, intimidation, frequent and indiscriminate use of mace and pepper spray on large numbers of students, racial profiling, handcuffs used on students’ whose 'crime' was being late, frequent searches, and more.”

Clearly this problem is greater than just one school district or just one state. This is a national problem which does nothing but create more crime by forcing people into becoming lifelong criminals who provide slave labor to private corporations while said corporations rake in absurd profits from taxpayers.

I find this instance to be one of the most troubling because it is shaping the way our young people look at life in the United States.

If you grow up in a prison-like environment, even being arrested for throwing paper airplanes, it is only natural to think that you might grow up viewing the world in a similar manner.

It also classifies our children as criminals and suspects in their most formative years, once again preparing their minds for a life of criminalization, dehumanization and degradation.

Thankfully, this is something that can be approached from the local level – where one person can make more of an impact than anywhere else.

By bringing these issues up and forcing the discussion of the undue criminalization of our children into public debate, some changes very well might be made.

However, if the propaganda and fear is pushed with the apparent effectiveness that it is right now we very well might see the American police state come to every school with disastrous consequences we are only just beginning to see.

Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at admin@EndtheLie.com

Comments Off on Creating lifelong customers the school to prison pipeline and the private prison industry

The president's first action under a push for more executive power would be to combine the trade and commerce departments, according to the Associated Press. Photo Credit:AP

President Barack Obama on Friday took aim at his government's own messy bureaucracy, prodding Congress to give him greater power to merge agencies and promising he would start by collapsing six major economic departments into one. Pressing Republicans on one of their own political issues, Obama said it was time for an "effective, lean government."

Obama wants the type of reorganizational authority last held by a president when Ronald Reagan was in office. Obama's version would be a so-called consolidation authority allowing him to propose only mergers that promise to save money and shrink government. The deal would help Obama considerably by entitling him to an up-or-down vote from Congress in 90 days.

Still, final say would remain with lawmakers, both on whether to grant Obama this fast-track authority and then in deciding whether to approve any of his specific ideas.

"We can do this better," Obama declared in an event with business owners at the White House, even presenting slides to help make his case.

"So much of the argument out there all the time is up at 40,000 feet, these abstract arguments about who's conservative or who's liberal," Obama said. "Most Americans – and certainly most small business owners – you guys are just trying to figure out how do we make things work, how do we apply common sense. And that's what this is about."

In an election year and a political atmosphere of tighter spending, Obama's move is about more than improving a giant bureaucracy. He is attempting to directly counter Republican arguments that he has presided over the kind of government regulation, spending and debt that can undermine the economy – a dominant theme of the emerging presidential campaign.

Republicans have often aligned themselves with smaller government. So politically, Obama is trying to put the onus on Republicans in the House and Senate to show why they would be against the pursuit of leaner government.

From Capitol Hill, a spokesman for Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the top Republican in the Senate, pledged Obama's plan would get a careful review.

But the spokesman, Don Stewart, also said: "After presiding over one of the largest expansions of government in history, and a year after raising the issue in his last State of the Union, it's interesting to see the president finally acknowledge that Washington is out of control."

Obama has an imperative to deliver. He made the promise to come up with a smart reorganization of the government in his last State of the Union speech last January.

At the time, Obama grabbed attention by pointing out the absurdity of government inefficiency. In what he called his favorite example, Obama said: "The Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they're in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them when they're in saltwater. And I hear it gets even more complicated once they're smoked."

The White House said the problem is serious for consumers who turn to their government for help and often do not know where to begin.

Not in decades has the government undergone a sustained reorganization of itself. Presidents have tried from time to time, but each part of the bureaucracy has its own defenders inside and outside the government, which can make merger ideas politically impossible. That's particularly true because "efficiency" is often another way of saying people will lose their jobs.

Obama hopes to enhance his chances by getting Congress to give him the assurance of a clean, relatively speedy vote on any of his proposals.

There is no clear sign that Obama would get that cooperation. He spent much of 2011 in utter gridlock with Republicans in Congress.

In the meantime, Obama announced Friday that Karen Mills, the administrator of the Small Business Administration, would be elevated to Cabinet-level rank. But her job would essentially disappear if Obama has his way.

If he gets the new fast-track power to propose legislation, Obama's first project would be to combine six major operations of the government that focus on business and trade.

They are: the Commerce Department's core business and trade functions; the Small Business Administration; the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative; the Export-Import Bank; the Overseas Private Investment Corporation; and the Trade and Development Agency. The goal would be one agency designed to help businesses thrive.

The White House says 1,000 to 2,000 jobs would be cut, but the administration would do so through attrition; that is, as people routinely leave their jobs over time.

The administration said the merger would save $3 billion over 10 years by getting rid of duplicative overhead costs, human resources divisions and programs.

The name and potential secretary of the new agency have not been determined.

The point, the White House says, is not just making the government smaller but better by saving people time and eliminating bureaucratic nightmares. The idea for the consolidated business agency grew out of discussions with hundreds of business leaders and agency heads over the last several months.

Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said streamlining government was always a potentially good idea but expressed wariness about whether Obama's plan would really help business.

"American small businesses are more concerned about this administration's policies than from which building in Washington they originate," Buck said. "We hope the president isn't simply proposing new packaging for the same burdensome approach."

According to the White House, presidents held such a reorganizational authority for about 50 years until it ran out during Reagan's presidency in 1984.

WHAT REAL PATRIOT’S DO

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government." -Thomas Paine

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out...without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, and intolerable.” FL. Hamer